CC 06-18-01
AGENDA
CUPERTINO CITY COUNCIL - REGULAR MEETING
CUPERTINO REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY - REGULAR MEETING
10300 Torre Avenue, City Hall Council Chamber
Monday, June 18,2001
6:45 p.m.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLLCALL
CEREMONIAL MATTERS - PRESENTATIONS
1. Presentation to state champion ice hockey teams, Bantam A Division Cupertino Cougars
and Pee Wee B Division Cupertino Cougars.
2. Presentation to winners of Bike-to-Work Week Challenge.
POSTPONEMENTS
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
This portion of the meeting is reserved for persons wishing to address the council on any matter
not on the agenda. Speakers are limited to three (3) minutes. In most cases, State law wil1
prohibit the council from making any decisions with respect to a matter not listed on the agenda.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Unless there are separate discussions and/or actions requested by council, staff or a member of
the public, it is requested that items under the Consent Calendar be acted on simultaneously.
3. Approval of minutes May 30, and June 4
4. Accounts Payable, June 1 and June 8, Resolution Nos. 01-126 and 01-127.
5. Payroll June 6, Resolution No. 01-128.
6. Approve the addition of article XVI to the League of California Cities' bylaws relating to
the establishment of a Grassroots Network.
7. Endorse the Draft Compact for a Sustainable Bay Area.
June 18, 2001 Cupertino City Council & Page 2
Cupertino Redevelopment Agency
8. Making determinations and approving the reorganization of area designated "N. Stelling
Road 00-12," prope~y located at 10599 N. Stelling Road, on the west side of Stelling
Road, between Gardena Drive and C-reenleaf Drive, approximately .24 acre (APN 326-
08-053) Lin-Hal Nan, Resolution No. 01-129.
9. Making determinations and approving the reorganization of area designated "Orange
Avenue 01-03," property located on Orange Avenue between Lomita Avenue and
Almaden Avenue; approxlmr~tely 0.121 acre, Vemulpalli and Talasila (APN 357-15-013),
Resolution No. 01-130.
10. Terms and conditions of employment for 2001-2002 fiscal year: A. Amending the listing of classifications and salary ranges, Resolution No. 01-131
B. Fixing the employer's contribution for medical insurance (Meyers-Geddes Act),
Resolution No. 01-132
C. Amending the un-represented compe~umtion program, Resolution No. 01-133
11. Approval of request for additional services from Winzler & Kelly Consulting Engineers
for Bollinger Road bicycle Trail Facility Improveiiient Project.
12. Improvement agreement: Reza Norouzi and Firouzeh Hoveidarad, 22771 Stevens Creek
Boulevard, APN 342-12-036, Resolution No. 01-134.
13. Approval of Contract Change Order No. 2 in the amount of ($249.00) for Traffic Signal
Installation at Stevens Creek Boulevard at Saich Way, Project No. 9526, Resolution No.
01-135.
14. Renewal of contract with Tally's Enterprises for reconstruction of curbs,' gutters,
sidewalks.
15. Approving the final map of Tract No. 9313, located at 22020 Homestead Road;
Developer Hossain E. Khaziri and Christine V. Khaziri, husband and wife as Joint
Tenants, and Michael M. Aminian, Trustee U/D/T Michael M. Amlnlan 1999 Trust
Dated April 23, 1999, accepting ce~in easements; authori~'Jng si~oning of flnAi map and
execution of agreement, Resolution No. 01-136. "
16. Recommendation to support Assembly Bill 78, sponsored by Assemblyworman ElAine
Alquist.
ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR (above)
PUBLIC HEARINGS
17. Ordering abatement of public nuisance (w~,.~ls and brush) pursuant to provisions of
Ord/nance 724 and Resolution No. 01-114, Resolution No. 01-137.
June 18, 2001 Cupertino City Council & Page 3
Cupertino Redevelopment Agency
18. Adopt the Operating Budget for the 2001-02 fiscal year, establish appropriation limit, and
approve the granting of a Negative Declaration.
Actions to be taken:
A. Adopt an operating and construction budget for fiscal year 2001-02 by ratifying
estimates of revenues to be received in each fund and appropriating monies there
for specified activities and accounts and setting forth conditions of administering
said budget, Resolution No. 01-138
B. Establish an appropriation limit for fiscal year 2001-02, Resolution No. 01-139
19. Nonpoint Source Pollution Program, Assessment of F~ for Sto,u Drainage Purposes,
Resolution No. 01-140.
PLANNING APPLICATIONS
UNFINIS~D BUSINESS
NEW BUSINESS
20. Monta Vista High School Student Paridng Pilot Program_
21. Designating a preferential parldng zone on Imperial Avenue between Alcazar Avenue and
McClellan Road, Resolution No. 01-141 (deferred from 6/4/01).
22. Presentation of a development appl/cation by Charles Corbalis, representing Canyon
Heights Academy, LLC, for a use permit and l'~Dnln~ to construct a 240,000 square foot
private school accommodating 1,500 students on the site of thc former McDonald-Dorsa
quarry (informational only-no action to be taken).
ORDINANCES
23. First reading of Ordinance No. 1881: "An Ordinance of the City Council of thc City of
Cupertino Amending Chapter 2.16 of the Cupertino Municipal Code, City Council -
Salaries."
STAFF REPORTS
COUNCIL REPORTS
Mayor James:
Cupertino Audit Committee
Economic Development Team
Environmental Review Committee- Alternate
Leadership Cupertino
Sune 18, 2001 Cupertino City Council & Page 4
Cup~ilno Redevelopment Agency
Legislative Review Committee
Library Steering Committee
Northwest Flood Control Zone Advisory Committee - Alternate
Santa Clara County Cities Association
Santa Clara County Emergency Preparedness Commission
Teen Task Force
West Valley Mayors and City Managers
Vice-Mayor Lowenthal:
Animal Control ~PA
Association of Bay Area Governments
Cupertino Audit Committee
Economic Development Team
Environmental Review Committee
Santa Clara County Cities Association- Alternate
Santa Clara County Committee on Housing and Community Development Block Grant
Program - Alternate
Santa Clara County Library District ]PA Board of Directors
Santa Clara County Transportation Agency Policy Advisory Committee - Alternate
Teen Task Force - Alternate
West Valley Mayors and City Managers - Alternate
Councilmember Bumett:
ABAG Board of Directors, Santa Clara County Cities Association Representative
North Central Flood Control Zone Advisory Committee
Northwest Flood Control Zone Advisory Committee
Public Dialog Liaison
Santa Clara County Committee on Housing & Community Development Block Grant
Program
Santa Clara County Library District ]PA Board of Directors - Alternate
Santa Clara County Solid Waste Commission - North County representative
Santa Clara County Transportation Agency Policy Advisory Committee
Santa Clara Valley Water Commission
Councilm~u,ber Chang:
Association of Bay Area Governments - Alternate
Leadership Cupertino
Legislative Review Committee
Library Steering Committee
Public Dialog Liaison
Santa Clara County Emergency Preparedness Commission- Alternate
Sister City Committee - Toyokawa
DRAFT MINLVI'ES
.... CUPERTINO CITY COUNCIL
Regular Adjourned Meeting
Wednesday, May 30, 2001
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
At 4:15 p.m. Mayor James called the meetinl~ to order in Conference Room C/D, 10300 Torre
Avenue, Cupertino, California.
ROLL CALL
City Council members present: Mayor Sandra James, Vice-Mayor Richard Lowenthal, and
Council members Don Bumctt and Michael ChAng. Council membe~ absent: None.
Staff present: City Manager David Knapp, Administrative Services Director Carol Atwood,
Community Development Director Steve Piasecki, Parks and Recreation Director Therese Smith,
Public Information Officer Rick Kitson, City Attorney Charles Kilian, and City Clerk Kimberly
Smith.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - None
STUDY SESSION
1. City Council study session on the 2001-2002 budget. The second of two study sessions,
this meeting included a review of the prior study session, depa~i,,,ent operlfling budgets,
finalization of the Capital Improvement Projects (CIP), funding options, and direction to
staff regarding program options.
Administrative Services Director Carol Atwood hi_.vhlightcd the General Fund and
explained how council's direction from the previous study session was now reflected in
this document. She then led a discussion regarding whether to sell excess property,
specifically the city's Oak Valley properties, to help fund Stevens Creek and the library,
or whether to hold the property as pan of the city's reserves.
Chang said he would support thc liquidation of Oak Valley properties now and wait on
the rest of thc propetiies until staff can review and made a recommendation on the matter.
Quails mentioned that it takes up to 6 months to auction a piece of property and
rocomm~lldod ~ that pro¢os~ now. He clarified that this does not mean the city
would be committed to sell the property.
Council concurred to start tim process of selling one Oak Valley lot this year and the
other two the year after.
May 30, 2001 Cupertino City Council Page 2
Atwood reviewed the budget assumptions and C~neral Fund revenues, mentioning that
no new revenue sources were included in this budget. She said that a 20% increase in
utility cost was reflected in the budget as well as a 20% increase in utility tax revenues,
but mentioned that the current utility cost increase is 50-60%. She said that staffwould
meet to discuss how to save energy.
Council directed staffto reflect the estimated increase in utility cost in the budget and
follow a more conservative approach.
Atwood lvviewed the General Fund expenditures and said that a total compensation
salary increase of 5% is reflected in the budget and that all of the line items were done
with zero based budgeting (each deparUnent looked at what they spent in prior years'and
evaluated what their needs were for next year).
Each manager reviewed his or her department's budget.
City Manager Dave K.?p said the Assistant City Attorney went from tlu~-q~er time
to full-time, an increase in the law enforcement area represented the new Red Light
pro.am and additional staff required, and there was a small increase in the PlO area in
the government channel operations.
Atwood reviewed the Administrative Services' budget, which included an increase in
Finance due to an additional state reporting requirement, stsfl'changes from part-time to
full-time and the addition of a Finance Manager;, additional costs in the City Clerks'
office due to elections and records mRn~gement; an increase in Human Resources/Code
Enforcement due to animal control costs; and an increase in Infommtion Technology due
to increased technology.
Parks and Recreation Director Therese Ambrosi Smith said that the biggest change in her
budget was a result of the new Senior Center and additional staff requirements.
Community Development Director Steve Piasecki said that there was an increase in his
budget from the General Plan exper_scs, the Cuperlino Community Service~ (CCS)
housing project and additional staff.
Public Works Director Ralph Q. slls said that the depmtment is status quo, with a
reduction due to a transfer from the Operating Budget into the Capital Improvement
Program (ClP) for pavement mslnt~.n~nco.
Lowenthal and Bumett agreed to meet with Quslls regarding the focus of a new Trs~c
Bngineer in regards to traffic calming.
Atwood reviewed the reserve policy, which totals $15 million.
Qualls reviewed the 5-yesr CIP draft revision, which included changes to the Four
Seasons Comer public art project, the skate park, the library, the Sports Center, City Hall
May 30, 2001 Cupertino City Council Page
improvements (conference room* and lobby carpet), Dc Anza/Stcvcns Creek crosswalk
enhancements and the Mary Avenue c~ossw~lic and parking project.
A discussion followed regarding Mary Avenue parking for the new Senior Center and
consideration of restricted park/ng on that street. Staff will bring a report back to Council
sometime in July.
Atwood asked for policy direct/on on the reserve policy and Council concurred to utilize
the reserves for acqu/sitions, including the library project. They further concurred that
revenues from the upcoming I/~impton Hotel would go back into the reserve fund.
She then reviewed the proposal CIP projects: the library, the skate park, the Sports
Center and options for the Teem Cemter for the future. She said thst the unfunded projects
would be listed on a separate sheet.
ADJO~
At 6:10 p.m., the meeting was adjourned.
Kimberly Smith, City Clerk
DRAFT MINUTES
CUPERTINO CITY COUNCIL
Regular Meeting
Monday, June 4, 2001
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
At 6:45 p.m. Mayor James called the meeting to order in the Council Chambers, 10300 Torte
Avenue, Cupertino, California, and led the Pledge of Allegiance.
ROLL CALL
City Council members present: Mayor Sandra James, Vico-Mayor Richard Lowenthal, and
Council members Don Bumctt and Michael Chang. Council members absent: None.
Staff present: City Manager David Knapp, Adininistrativc Services Director Carol Atwood,
Community Development Director Steve Piasecki, Public Works Director Ralph Quails, City
Attorney Charles Kilian, Senior Civil En~necr Michael Fuller, and Deputy City Clerk Grace
Johnson.
CEREMONIAL MATTERS - PRESENTATIONS
1. Presentation of a monetary con~bution for improvements at Blackben3, Farm by Lion's
Club representative John Kolski.
Thc item was continued.
POSTPONEMENTS - None
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
A supplemental memo for item #10 was distributed recommending that the public hearing be
opened and then continued to July 16 at 7 p.m. to allow for mailed notices to be provided to
customers.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Bud Kundich reported a property overgrown with weeds, between Homestead Road and 1-280,
adjacent to Homestead High School.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Bumett moved to approve the it=-.* on the Consent Calendar as recommended. Lowenthal
seconded and the motion carried 40.
oo
2. Approval of minutes: May 21 and May 23.
June 4, 2001 Cupertino City Council & Page 2
Cupertino Redevelopment Agency
3. Accounts payable: May 18 and May 25, Resolution Nos. 01-118 and 0 I-119.
4. Payroll: May 25, Resolution No. 01-120.
5. Treastu~Fs Budget Report- April 2001.
6. Review of application for Alcoholic Beverage Control license: Thai Delight, 20916
Homestead Road.
7. Contract Change Order No. 1, Miller Avenue Bicycle Facility Improvement Project,
Project No. 9438, and South Stelling Road Bicycle Facility Improvement Project, Project
No. 9412, Resolution No. 01-121.
8. Acceptance of city projects performed under contract: Miller Avenue Bicycle Facility
lmprowment Project, Project No. 9438, and South Stelling Road Bicycle Facility
Improvc~,ent Project, Project No. 9412.
9. Acceptance of municipal improvements (may include grading, street improvements, on-
site end off-site improvements):
a) 10112 Camino Vista Drive, APN 342-14-065, Nan Yin Ku
'-- b) 10322 N. Stelling Rd., APN 326-30-089, G. B. Estate Homes, LLC
c) Lisa Wang, 10171 Camino Vista Dr., APN 342-14-086
d) Shen-Wei Shiao and Tai-Yi Shiao, 21799 Almaden Ave., APN 357-15-092
e) Kenneth A. Clark, 10151 Amelia Court, APN 326-17-022
Vote Members of the CiW Council
AYES: Burnett, Change, James, Lowenthal
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
ITEMS REMOVED FROM THR CONSENT CALENDAR (above) - None
Mayor James re-ordered the agenda to take tip discussion of New Business item No. 12 next:
12. Approval of recommendation of Simon Martin-Vague Winlrelstein Moris (S~ as
the architectural team for the Cupertino L~rary and authorize execution of architectural
design agrecment, Resolution No. 01-122.
Public Works Director Ralph Qualls reviewed the staff report and said that out of 14
· --- responses, 5 firms were interviewed and the rum of SMWM was selected and a contract
was successfully negotiated.
June 4, 2001 Cupe~ino City Council & Page 3
Cupertino Redevelopment Agency
Linda Sobuta, the principle a~chitect, introduced the mea~bers of the firm who will be
involved in the project and gave a powerpoint presentation on the firm's design approach
and important themes for the City's new library.
Charles Liggett said that due to the budget issues that the Public Works Director outlined
in a recent memo, he thought it might be too soon to hire a consultant to design the
library. He also said that the Library Steering Committee did not vote unanimously for
the curr~t site and that the professional librarians on that committee voted unanimously
for a different site for the cor~kaction. He asked that the Council defer the selection of
the architect until a more definitive approach could be taken.
Jean Gallup, a member of Friends of the Lil~rary and a steering committee member,
confumed the selection of SEtW2~I. She said she visited the Newport Library, which the
firm showed to the committee as an oxarilple, ~ said that the firm had great ideas, paid
attention to what a library needs, and used mate~iais well and innovatively.
Council concurred with the selection of SMWM.
Lowenthal moved to adopt Resolution No. 01-122. Chang seconded and the motion
carried 4-0.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
10. Consideration of water rate changes proposed by the San Jose Water Company for
Cupertino water customers (to be heard at 7:00 p.m.).
Public Works Director Ralph Quails reviewed the staff report and discussed a
supplemental m~mo suggesting a continuation. He said that the City's ordinance and
lease agre~-ent with the San Jose Water District requires that a public hearing be held to
consider the increased rates proposed by the water company. He said thor the water
company didn't completely fulfill the noticing requirements, but since it had been noticed
in the newspaper, he suggested thst the public hearing be opened to hear any t~-~imony
and then continue the hearing, to July 16 at 7 p.m. to hear any additional testimony.
The public hearing was opened'at ?:25 p.m. No testimony was heard and the item was
continued to July 16 at 7 p.m.
11. First of two public hearings to review proposed 2001/02 Budget (prernninsry review).
Administrative Director Carol Atwood reviewed the staff report and gave a powerpoint
presentation on the budgst. She talked shout the budget assumptions, the general fund
revenue, revenues at r~k~ revenue projections, general fund expenditures, depa, huent
operating budgets, Capital Improvement Program (CPI), and the reserve policy.
The public hearing was opened at 7:35 p.m. No testimony was heard and the hearing was
closed at 7:35 p.m.
June 4, 2001 Cupertino City Council & Page 4
Cupertino Reclevelopment Agency
-' PLANNING APPLICATIONS
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
NEW BUSINESS
12. Item No. 12 was heard after Oral Commnnications.
13. Report on procedures for Council consideration of permit parking petitions from
Cupertino neighborhoods and consideration of petitions for permit parking on Tula Lane
and Imperial Avenue.
A. Designating a preferential parking zone on Tula Lane to include the first Saturday
of each month between 8:00 a.m. and 12:00 p.m., Resolution No. 01-123
Public Works Director Ralph Qualls reviewed the staff report and said that the
Municipal Code provides for piefeteafial parking w/thin the city. He said that past
practice has been to bring a petition forward using forms provided by the City,
and after evaluation by staff, to bring the petition to Council on the Consent
Calendar. He suggested an alt~'aafive approach would be to bring the item to
Council as a New Business item as an inform~ hearing and give a staff
recommendation based on criteria from the ordinance and any background
information, as Council had dire~od previously.
Q~nlls said that staffmet with the Tula Lane residents and that the enforc=mant on
flea market days is rigorous. He said that the resident complaln~s were not
enforcement related, but that the vehicle still remains even after having been
given a citation, which causes congestion. He clarified that if the preferential
parking existed than people would avoid the area altogether, knowing they would
be cited. Since there is currently no limit on parking, people park everywhere,
even illegally. Quails noted the cost to park at De ,~nTa is $2.
The following individuah expressed their favor for preferential parking, citing
concerns about congestion, safety and fire hazards, from blocking fire hydrants, if
the it~.,, is not passed. They felt that 4 hour~ of pref~reatt~al parking once a month
was reasonable.
Bob Sapirstein: 10300 Tula Lane
Herbert Trujillo, 10330 Tula Lane
C-en Sapir~ 10300 Tula Lane
Sp~-rt Colvin, 20860 Tula Court
Lowenthal and James said that although they are opposed to permit parkin~ in
general, that they could support this resolution given the limited amount of t/me.
Chang and Bumett supported the resolut/on.
June 4, 2001 Cupertino City Council & Page 5
Cupertino Redavelopm~nt Agency
Lowenthal suggested the idea of having signage, directing people W park at De
AnTa College. Qualls said that staffwould look into this idea.
Council discussed the idea of proacfively extending the permit parking to all the
areas around De Anza for the flea market timeframe, sincc people may not even
want it. Mayor James suggested that this would be a good topic for the City-
School Summit meeting.
Lowenthal moved to adopt Resolution No. 01-123. Chang seconded and the
motion carried 4-0.
B. Designating a preferential parking zone on Imperial Avenue between Alcazar
Avenue and McClellan Road, Resolution.No. 01-124
(~slls reviewed the s~ff report and said that the residents' petition requested
preferential parking for the same hours as the adjacent s~reets ~round Monta Vista
High School.
Chang pointed out that there is a difference between long-term high school
parking and short-term parking for the elementary school.
The following individuals expres_~ed their support for preferential parking citing
concerns about illegal long-term parking from the high school students, unsafe
streets for elementary children walking to school due to the number of cars parked
and not having any space to park their own cars in front of their houses.
Sendie Zander, 10390 Imper/al Avenue
Ashok Bhafia, 10415 Imperial Avenue
Manju Chexal, 10425 Imper/al Avenue
Council comments included: looking into shared parldng with other schools and
neighbors and to be aware of the impact on the Lincoln Elementary parents with
permit paring; Monta Vista High School not having provided adequate resources
for their students to park; getting the community together to talk about a shared
parking program; and having staff bring definite recommendations to Council
along with future petitions regarding neighborhood parking.
Council directed staff to amend the procedure on brining preferential parking
petitions to Council, to look into putting up signage at the entry to the
neighborhood directing people to park at De Anza College, and to reopen the offer
to the school district about student parking at Blackberry Farm, taking the
neighbors into consid~..~ion.
Council concurred to defer this item to June 18.
June 4, 2001 Cupertino City Council & Page 6
Cupertino Redevelopment Agency
'-' ORDINANCES -Nonc
STAFF REPORTS
Public Works Director Ralph Quails introduced Deputy City En~neer Mike Fuller, who comes
to Cupertino from Mountain View.
COUNCIL REPORTS
Lowcnthal met with neighbors about the Monta Vista parking issue.
Burnett said he found out that vehicle license fees are to be returned.
Chang said he thought the budget study sessions were well prepared and thanked staff, especially
Administrative Services Director Carol Atwood.
James said she attended the first City-School Summit where one of the topics was affordable
housing for teachers. She also attended promotional exercises for the sheriff's depamnent in
which Captain JeffMiles was promoted to Commander and the new captain is Dennis Bacon; the
installation of new officers meetin~ at the Quota Club; the West Valley Mayors and Managers
meeting at the Outback Steakhouse; end the retiring of a youth court judge. She mentioned that a
-- special education teacher in our disUict will be honored as an outstanding commullity activist
and her story will be a national television program.
CLOSED SESSION - None
ADJOURNMENT
At 8:30 p.m. the meeting was adjourned to a study session regarding a proposal fi~m Compaq
Computers for a mixed-use development on vacant land on Stevens Creek Blvd., Monday, June
11 at 5:00 p.m. in Conference Room C/D, 10300 Torre Avenue.
Grace Johnson, Deputy City Clerk
RESOLUTION NO. 01-126
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COLINC1L OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS PAYABLE IN THE AMOUNTS
AND FROM THE FUNDS AS HEREINAFrER DESCRIBED FOR GENERAL AND
MISCELLANEOUS EXPENDITURES FOR THE PERIOD ENDING
~ 01, 2001
WHEREAS, the Director of Adminiswative Services or her designated
representative has certified to ac, curacy of thc following claims and demands and to the
availability of funds for payment hereof; and
WHEREAS, the said claims and demands have been audited as required by law.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council hereby allows
the following claims and dr,~ands in the amounts and from the funds as here'mafler set
forth in Exhibit "A".
CERTIFIED:
Director of Administrative Services
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Cupertino this day of ,2001, by the following vote:
Vote Memb=~.~ of the City Council
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST: APPROVED:
City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupertino
08/01/01 CITY OF CUPERTIHO PAGE 1
ACCOI~TZNG PERZOD: 12/01 CHECK REGZS-I-~A o DZSBURSEM~ FT~ID
SELKC~I0~q CRITERIA: CranBacc.~rans_dace lM~ween "05/28/2001" and '08/01/2001"
~ - 110 - GEI~RA~ FOND
CASH ACCTCHECKNO ISS~'EDT .............. V--I~Z~OR ............. FI~D/DEPT ..... DESCRIFTIO~I ...... S~L~q TAX AMOUNT
1020 S85186 V 05/25/01 626 SANTA C~aARA CO DEPT 0F R 1104510 ~MP FINGERPRINTING 0.00 -160.00
1020 585207 V 05/25/01 M2001 TARRELL, KATHERINE 580
1020 S85222 06/01/01 1695 3M 2708404 SUPPLIES 0.00 102.87
1020 585223 06/01/01 7 ~ PLAN CORPORATIO~ 1104540 FAY CLAIM/LEGAL COSTS 0.00 376.71
1020 S85223 06/01/01 7 J~XG PLAN CORPORATI0~ 1104540 FAY CLAiM/LEGAL COSTS 0.00 75.75
TOTAL CHECK O.00 452.46
1020 585224 06/01/01 8 ABAG PLAN CORP (OLD DON' 6204550 NGP3~l~5 C0t4P TRUST 0.00 29683.42
1020 585225 06/01/01 9 ABAG POWER PU/~CHASING PO 5606620 GAS S~V TO 5/16/01 0.00 1547.54
1020 S85225 06/01/01 9 ABAG POM~ P~]~CHASING PO 1108501 GAS S~V TO 5/16/01 0.00 2637.49
1020 S85225 06/01/01 9 ABAG POME~ ~CHASING PO 1108509 GR~ $~RV TO 5/16/01 0.00 124.47
1020 585225 06/01/01 9 'A BAG ~ PU~OiASING PO 1108503 GA~ S~V TO 5/16/01 0.00 1517.&3
1020 585225 06/01/01 9 ABAG POMER PURC}U~SZNG PO 1108507 GA~ S~RV TO 5/16/01 0.00 771.27
1020 585225 06/01/01 9 ABAG PO~E~ PUrChASING PO 1108506 GAS SERV TO 5/16/01 0.00 257.24
1020 565225 06/01/01 9 ABAG. POWEH F0~CHA~ZNG PO 1105508 GA~ S~RV TO 5/16/01 0.00 116.45
1020 585225 06/01/01 9 ABAG ~ Ir~RCHASING PO 5708510 GAS SERV TO 5/16/01 0.00 1302.95
1020 585225 06/01/01 9 A~Ag2 POllER F0~CNASING PO 1108505 GA8 S~V TO 5/16/01 0.00 493.32
1020 585225 06/01/01 9 ABAG POWE~ PURCHASING PO 1108504 ~ $~RV TO 5/16/01 0.00 4281.54
TOTAL CHECK 0.00 13050
1020 585226 06/01/01 M2001 ACADEMYX 6104800 D~J~4WBAV~R (~8/PO 128 0.00 295.00
1020 585227 06/01/01 2099 ~ANTS INC. 1104510 TEMp T. F~ICK 0.00 467.S0
1020 585226 06/01/01 13 ACME & SONS SANITATION C 5606640 FY 2000-2001 OPE~ PURC 0.00 168.80
1020 565229 06/01/01 1680 ADVANTAG~ G9~FIX 1104000 PAPeR/PO 12652 0.00 25.97
1020 585230 06/01/01 29 LYNN~ DIANE Al'~-ru~ 5806449 SERVIC~ AG~~EM~NT POR 0.00 92.00
1020 565231 06/01/01 918 ALAMO WORLD T~AVEL AND T 5506549 BA~ D~ PAGBA~T/MA~-a-~a~ 0.00 28990.41
1020 '585232 06/01/01 1251 AL~LI~IC~ TITLB 4209115 P~LZM TITLE RPT VALLC 0.00 375.00
1020 585233 06/01/01 44 ~2~ZC~N ~BD CROSS 5806449 CPR CARDS/PO 16809 0.00 65.00
1020 565233 06/01/01 64 AM~ICA~ RBD CKOSS 5805449 ~u'~LIg8 P.O.1678V 0.00 145.00
1020 565233 06/01/01 44 P24~ICA~ RED ~ 5805449 5U~PLI~ P.0.16807 0.00' 180.00
TOTAL CHECK 0.00 390.00
1020 585234 06/01/01 M2001 A.~'~RICA~,SOCIETYONAGZN 1106500 ~BE~,SHIP D'u'KS 0.00 135.00
1020 585235 05/01/01 142001 A,S,~OCIA*nsu CGH'I'RACTO.q8 C 560 ~ PI(:~C DKP BBF 0.00 50.00
1020 585236 06/01/01 71 B & R ZCB CREAM DIST 5606620 FY 2000-2001 OPB~ I:~C 0.00 774.00
1020 585237 06/01/01 100 B~I IMAGING SYHTE~d$ 1104300 FY 2000-2001 OPE~ LR~C 0.00 302.38
1020 585237 08/01/01 100 B01I ZMAGING S~-L*md~ 1104300 FY 2000-2001 O1~ PURC 0.00 289
' RON DATE 06/01/01 TI~ 05:55:04 - FZNMICIAL ACCOT.~TING
~$/01/0! cz'~ OF cr.~,J~?zllo PAGE
J~'COU~T~XNG PZRXOD: 12/01 ~ R~X~ DXSB~ ~
x020 585238 os/o~/o~ ~00~ ~ ~x045~0 ~c. SEc. XNFO~ 0.00
~020 585239 06/0~/0~ 122 ~ ~ 5806449 S~X~ ~ ~R 0.00 X~71.80
~020 585240 06/01/01 1670 ~ ~X~ 4209216 SRV ~ SOlD ~ 0.00 49S0.00
~020 58524~ 06/0X/0L 1460 ~ ~X~ 6104800 ~B SX~ ~ 0.00 3997.50
~020 585242 06/0X/0L 149 ~ ~L04510 ~=:-*': ~H 0.00 60.26
X020 585242 os/0:/o~ 149 ~ ~04000 ~'X~X-x ~ 0.00 4.79
X020 585242 o;/ox/0x X49 ~H ~045~0 ~=':-~z ~ 0.00 7.55
X020 S85242 o6/ox/o: ~49 ~ ~0860~ ~tz ~ 0.00 6.38
X020 585242 os/ox/ox 149 ~H XXOX000 f=:-X-~ ~H 0.00 70.20
X020 S85242 06/0X/0X ~49 ~H 220401~ ~=~' ~H 0.00 62.07
X020 SSS242 o;/o~/ox ~49 ~ ~03500 ~-~'~ ~H 0.00 ~X.78
~ 0.00 250.23
1020 585243 06/0~/01 152 ~:~I~x~ ~TI~ ~101500 ~ ~ ~T ~l~ 4~ 0.00 127.S4
~0: S85244 06/0Z/0~ 155 ~ ~ ~ ~108408 ~P~1ES 0.00 ?5.98
1020 S85245 06/OZ/01 160 ~Z~'S ~T ~O 5806349 S~VI~ ~E~ ~R 0.00 1787.83
1020 585246 06/0~/0~ 179 ~ ~ ~02403 ~T ~ P~ 0.00 1080.89
~020 S8524S 0S/0~/0~ 179 ~ ;~ ~02403 ~T ~ P~ 0.00 1594.18
~ ~CK 0.00 2675.07
1020 585247 06/01/01 184 ~ ~ 5606620 S~VX~ ~E~ ~R 0.00 200.00
~020 585248 06/0~/0t 187 ~Y ~ ~M~ 5806349 SKRVI~ ~RE~ ~R 0.00 1063.~
1020 585249 06/01/01 ~001 ~ ~104510 ~ ~ZSZ~ 0.00
1020 S8S2S0 06/01/01 23S4 ~~S~ [NC 2708405 ~ ~ ~PAZ~ 0.00
1020 5852Sl 06/0~/01 1964 CuvM~ W ~L-~ ~ ~0~S00 ~E ~ ~ OF 0,00 4~2.00
1020 585252 06/01/01 676 DRP~ OF ~X~ 1104510 F~ PRI~I~ 0.00 160.00
XO20 585253 0S/0X/02 850 DX~ ~X~ P~ ~ SS0634g S~PLX~ P.O.222S3 0.00 45.90
X020 58S2S4 0G/0X/0X 250 ~T ~QF~ 5806349 SB~~ ~R 0.00 4876.80
~o2o sss2ss os/ox/ox 2s3 ~ L~ S~X~ 5606620 ~ 2000*2Q01 OPn ~C 0.00 23~,36
X020 585256 06/0~/01 ~255 FX~ ~X~ DX=-&-~B 6308840 ~X~ 0.00
XC 585257 06/0X/0X ~00X ~, ~ 570 ~XT~ 0.00
~ DAT~ 06/01/01 TINE 09:55;05 - FXNNICXAL A~JIITXli]
J6/01/01 CXTY OF CUPERTINO PAGE 3
'~'COUNTXNG PE.I~ZOD: 12/01 CHECK REGZ~-L~u~ - D~SB~r ~
~H A~ ~CK ~ XSS~ ~ .............. V~ ............. ~/DE~ ..... DES~Z~ ......
2020 585258 06/0Z/0~ 266 RX~ ~s 5806449 S~vx~ ~RE~ ~R 0.00 1830.80
1020 585259 06/01/01 274 ~Y'S 5~I~ 2708403 ~ RZ~H ~ 7 ~ 0.00 747.94
~020 58S259 06/01/01 274 ~Y'S ;~ 2708403 S~P~X~ P.O.~5068 0.00 35.59
~ ~CK 0.00 983.53
~020 585260 0E/0Z/0~ 202? ~C~ ~L04400 S~P~Z;S O.00 61.52
1020 585261 06/01/0~ 300 ~~ 5806449 S~VX~ ~ ~R 0.00 183.40
1020 585262 06/0~/0~ 315 ~X~ WF 5806449 S~VX~ ~ ~R 0.00 2)0.00
1020 585263 06/01/0~ ~001 ~, ~X~ 550 ~C ~ O.00 55.00
1020 585264 06/0~/01 328 ~ ~ 5806449 S~VX~ ~
~020 585265 06/01/0Z ZOB6 ~X~ ~Z~ Zi0ES00 S~VX~ ~ FOR 0.00 560.00
X020 585266 06/0~/0~ 1544 ~-~-L- P~ ~107405 HP ~ ~E ~ 0.00 1044.58
1020 5e5267 06/0~/01 Z235 HX~K ~X~ ZN~ 6414570 ~ 2001 ~ 0.00
~020 5~526~ 06/01/01 ~235 HXGW LXF~ XN~ 110 ~ 2001 ~
~ ~CK 0.00
1020 585268 06/01~0~ ~847 ~ ID~ B~ 5606620 ~T A~ORI~ ~ 0.00 6~.64
Z020 585268 06/0~/01 1847 ~ XD~O~ 5606620 ~RT A~X~ ~ 0.00 391.50
~ ~CK 0.00 45~.X4
~020 585269 06/0~/01 ~242 XN~-~X~S ~X04510 B~ ~/~Z~Z
X020 585269 06/0~/0~ 1242 X~-~X~S X~045~0 ;~ ~~ 0.00
~020 585269 06/OX/OZ ~242 XNS~-~X~S ~X07503 BUS ~S/~,~ 0.00 X61.45
1020 585269 06/01/01 1242 X~-~X~ 1~04310 ~ ~ ~ HX~ g 0.00 2413.63
~ ~ 0.00 3~09.68
1020 585270 06/01/01 1412 ~BS AVA[~ Z~ 1~04510 B~ ~-5/7~5/21 0.00 2~1.84
L020 S~527t 06/01/01 2285 ~ ~ ;~-~ 1106265 S~Z~ ~ ~ 0.00 120.00
1020 585272 06/01/01 363 ~ ~Y S~S ~ 580~449 ~VZ~ ~
1020 585273 06/01/01 1062 ~-~1~ 1104530 CITATI~ ~
1020 5~5274 06/0~/01 371 ~I~ EI; 5~06449 ~ ~
1020 5~5275 06/01/01'376 ~gY~ XNC 5609105 8YS~ ~X~ ~0~ 0.00 12792.00
1020 5852?5 06/01/01 376 ~ ~ X~ 5609105 V~ ~K KZT ~ KXT 0.00 1475.64
1020 5852?6 06/01/01 382 ~X~-~ ~l~l~ 5506~9 ~ ~Sk~'~ 0.00 5~4.00
06/01/01 TXM~ 05:S5z06 - FXI~X~J, ACCCYJNTXNO
,G/OlIO1 C2*TY OF C'UPERT2*IIO PAGE 4
~C~X~TG P~XO~: 12/01 ~CK R~X~ - DZ~
iQ20 585~?? 0G/01/01 385 ~ ~ ~UPP~Y 5~0~349 ~Z~ P.0.16801 0.00 51.25
~020 58S278 06/0~/0~ 392 ~ OF ~X~ZA CXT ZIOB00Z ~ ~F. 9/~2/Z0 0.00 2~S.00
Z020 585279 - 06/0X/0X 393 ~ ~ S806449 S~VX~ ~ F~ 0.00 236.00
1020 585280 06/01/01 400 LX~ ~X8 ~ 5?06450 ~ZS ZHS~UCI~ ~ O.00 42126.58
~020 585~8X 06/0~/01 ~001 ~E, ~ 5700000 P~T~ ~ I ~ CP 0.00 S00.00
XO20 585~82 0G/OX/0X 1968 ~ ~ ~ 1104000 ~S BZ~Z~ 0.00 14539.40
Lo20 585283 06/01/01 ~602 ~A~ZS~VI~ ~ ~100000 4~ ~ 0.00 ~250.00
~020 585284 06/0~/0~ ~001 ~Y, ~ 1100000 ~ B L2~SE ~E 0.00 95,73
1020 S85285 06/0~/01 437 ~'~ ~SP~ 11010~0 ~ ~ ~ 0.00 115.00
~020 585285 06/01/01 43~ ~-AO~SP~ L104300 ~ 2000-200~ O~ ~C 0.00 S2.S0
~020 S85285 0G/02/Q1 43V ~'~'~ ~SP~ 1104300 ~ 2000-200: O~ ~C 0.00 70.00
~ ~ 0.00
1020~ 585286 06/01/01 2157 ~ ~ 5806349 S~VZ~ ~ ~R 0,00 492.80
102v 585287 06/0L/Q1 465 ~AIH Y~ ~ ~ 5208003 ~P~I~ 0.00 58.60
~020 585287 06/01/01 465 ~ VZn ~ ~ ~082~S
~020 58528~ 06/01/01 465 ~N V~ ~ ~ 1108315 SUPPLIES 0.00 ~10.05
· 020 585287 0S/0~/01 465 ~AIH Vl~ ~ ~ L1083~5
~020 58528~ 06/01/0~ 465 ~ VI~ ~ ~ 1108314 ~PLZ~ ~.00 84.38
~020 S85287 06/0~/0~ 465 ~IH V~ ~ ~ 1~08312 ~ 0.00 29.11
1020 585287 06/0~/0~ 465 ~IH VI~ ~ ~ L108321 ~ 0.00 38,62
1020 S85287 0G/01/01 465 ~AIH Vl~ ~ ~ 1108312 S~I~ 0.00 2~5.79
~020 58528~ 06/0~/0~ 465 ~AIN VZ~ ~ ~ 110832~ ~PLIES 0.00 97.04
~ ~EC~ 0.00 691.81
1020 585288 06/01/01 473 ~DZ~IB~ ~C 5606620 ~ 2000-200~ O~ ~C 0.00 141~.34
~20 585289 06/02/0~ 4~9 ~ ~ 5606620 ~ 2000-200~ OP~ ~C 0.00 338.58
~020 585290 06/01/01 489 ~ GIC S~L 5806349 S~VI~ ~ FOR 0.00 3353.43
1020 S6529~ 06/01/01 192 ~ ~ATZ~ ~ 11~510 ~-~ ~SZ~ 0.00 75,00
2020 SBS292 0G/0~/0~ 2206 O.X, FI~ ~ ~ ~04400 ~ 0.00 127.30
1020 585294 06/01/0~ 493 O~l~ ~ 1108~01 S~I~ 0.00 ~30.63
1020 S85294 06/01/01 493 0~ ~ 1106265 ~:~ 0.00 3:.22
~020 SS5224 06/0~/01 493 O~ ~ 5606~20 ~ 0.00 228.63
1020 S85294 06/01/01 493 O~Z~ 22040~L ~v~ 0.00 39.66
~020 585294 06/0~/0~ 493 OFFZ~ ~ 5606680
10~ S8S294 06/0~/01 493 O~Z~ ~ 1107503
1C 585294 06/01/01 493 OFFZ~ DE~ 11~100 ~F~Z~ 0.00 -235.86
RUN DATE 06/01/02, TXI~ 09:55:07 -
I
)6/01/01 C/"I'Y OP CUPBRTIHO PAGE 5
3El, SCribE CEITDE;A: ~ransacC.~rans_clace between .05/28/2001" and #06/01/2001"
FUND - 110 - GENERAL ~
CASMACCT CH~CKHO ISSUE D'r .............. VENDOR ............. F'L~D/DEPT ..... DESCRIP'FION ...... SAL~S TAX AMOUtiT
1020 585294 08/01/01 493 OFF/C~ DBPO'F 1104510 IUPPLIRS 0.00 100.89
~020 585294 06/01/01 493 OFF/CE DEPO'F 1108601 SUPPLIES 0.00 207.10
1020 · 585294 06/01/01 493 ' OFF/CE DEPOT 1107503 STJppL/ES 0.00 &0.60
1020 585294 06/01/01 493 OFFICE DEI:~'~ 1108601 SUPP~/ES 0.00 408.21
1020 585294 06/01/01 493 OFFICE DEPOT 1107503 SUPPLIES 0.00 14.26
1020 585294 08/01/01 493 OFF/CE DEPOT 1106246 SUPpLIeS 0.00 192.45
1020 585294 06/01/01 493 OFFIC'R DEPO'F 1104000 SUPPLIES 0.00 46.60
1020 585294 06/01/01 493 OFF/CE DEPOT 5806449 SUPPLIES 0.00 40.81
1020 585294 06/01/01 493 OFFICE DEPOT 1107503 SUPPLIES 0.00 64.68
1020 585294 06/01/01 493 OFFICE DEPOT 1108101 SUPPLIES 0.00 18.44
1020 585294 06/01/01 493 OFFICE DEPOT 1104100 SUPPLIES 0.00 235.88
1020 585294 06/01/01 493 OFFICE DEFOT 1108101 SUPPLISS 0.00 162.32
1020 585294 06/01/01 493 OFFICE DEPOT 1104000 SUPPI. ZES 0.00 58.10
1020 585294 06/01/01 493 OFFICE DEPOT 1106265 SOPPLISS 0.00 190.30
1020 585294 06/01/01 493 OFFICE DEPOT 1107301 SUPPLIES 0.00 129.42
1020 585294 06/01/01 493 OFFICE DEPOT 1104000 SUPPLIES 0.00 74.13
1020 585294 06/01/01 493 OFFICE DEPOT 2204010 S*~PPLIES 0.00 69.53
1020 585294 06/01/01 493 OFF/CE DEPOT 1107503 SUPPLIES 0.00 1.78
1020 585294 06/01/01 493 OFFICE DE~'O¥ 5606620 SUPPI,ISS 0.00 388.98
TOTAL C H ECS, 0.00 3540.94
1020 585295 06/01/01 507 DA~ OSBOR~R DBA:OSBOP,..N~ 1108303 ~Zf'~ A MA'I'E~ZAL 0.00 685.67
1020 585295 06/01/01 507 DAN OSBOiIHB DBA:OSBORHR 1108303 ~IME & MATERZAT,, 0.0O 1588,'
1020 S8529S 06/01/01 507 DAN OSBOIU~ DBA:OSBOP/qE 1108503 71F1~ & I~.TERIAL 0.00 2550
1020 585295 06/01/01 507 DAN OSBOBHB I:~,A:DEBOP,~ 1108503 ~IMB & MA'i'~R/AL 0.00 2885.00
'FO/'ALC'HE~K 0.00 7709.56
1020 585296 06/01/01 511 PACIFIC BEt.r* 1108501 MAY 2001 0.o0 18.09
1020 585297 06/01/01 M2001 PARKS, BIT,I, 5700000 RKFF. AqI~ FOR 3 )TI'H PASS 0.00 99.00
1020 585298 06/01/01 M2001 PEC]C~ TRAVRL 5506549 '/'ODE OF FRAHCE 0.00 1200.00
1020 S85299 06/01/01 S26 PENZHSU",,A BLDEPI~IHT 1108Z01 REF',,q~ 0.00 -142.72
1020 585299 06/01/01 526 PE~INSV, JLA BLUEPP. ZI~T 110 R.KF R#8828 IMPROV P1d~i 0.00 177.60
TOTAL CHECK 0.00 34.88
1020 585300 06/01/01 S31 PBPSI-COLACOI4PANY 5806349 TEEH PROGPJ)J4 0.00 190.00
1020 S85300 06/01/01 S31 PEPSZ-COLA (:~HPANY S806249 V~mINO PRGOIU~4 0.00 518.80
TOTAL, CJ.[ECK 0.00 708.60
1020 585301 06/01/01 S45 d~ PXSERCEIO 5606640 GOLF COT,~,~S COH"~RACT i 0.00 1790.00
1020 585302 06/01/01 142001 PORTAL pLA~R, 1100000 RgLr' TRBE I~MVL i~3:),3BCY O.00 187.00
1020 585303 06/01/01 1647 POb'I34AS'I'BR 1108601 PBg. MIT #326 0.00 40.00
1020 585304 06/01/01 2380 I~,CHA.SB ~q3MBR 1104310 POSTAGB Pm~-t~. RRSET 0,00 1000.00
1020 585305 06/01/01 575 RECYCAT,, SUgPLY 4249218 14SD RECTAII':.T.~ I~'TA/, NA 0.00 1771.33
RDE DA'TK 06/01/Q1 TII~ 09:55:09
4/01/01 c~Y oF f~JPERTII~O PAGE 6
CCOU~ITZNG PERIOD: ~2/0~ ~~ - DZSB~
~A~~ ls~ .............. ~R ............. ~/DE~ .....
020 585206 06/0~/0~ SeZ ~L~ Z~04300 S~I~ P.0.12049 0.00 38.23
020 585306 06/0~/0~ 58~ ~ ~04300
~020 585308 06/0~/02 234~ R~ ~ ~ 5609105 ZN~ I 3/4" ~ 4 I 0.00 2748.00
~020 585309 06/0~/0~ 2043 R~'S P~~ 5606620 B~ & U~P ~OL 0.00 ~50.00
~020 S853~0 0G/0L/02 ~00~ ~ ~ & ~ ~L08001 ~V. ~ ~F 9/~2/ 0.00 ~45.00
~020 5853~2 0G/0~/O~ ~002 ~, ~ T SS0 ~C R~ 0.00 S5.00
~020 S853~2 06/0~/0~ 631 ~A ~ ~ ~ ~I 52080Q3 ~I~ ~O~ 0.0O 5323.83
2020 S853~2 06/01/0~ 631 ~ ~ DR~ ~Z 5208003 ~DK ~0~ 0.00 6228.99
~020 5853~3 06/02/0~ 633 ~ ~ ~ ~2 5606620
~020 5853~3 06/01/01 633 ~ ~ ~ ~ 5806349 O~r~ ~ 6~ ~ D 0.00 3~8.22
202~ S85324 06/0~/0~ 639 ~VIN C~TI~ (~PIE 2~04320 ~ 506~869 0.00 4298.4~
~020 5853~5 06/02/02 644 S~S2~S ~04400 ~T/~I~PE S~ 0.00 245.96
1020 585316 06/01/0~ 64~ ~I~ S~ 5806449 S~V~ ~ ~a 0.00 253.00
~ ~CK 0.00 .~74.80
1020 585319 06/01/01 681 ~lB ~ b-~-~S 5806449 S~VI~ ~ ~ 0.00 400.00
~020 585320 06/0~/0~ 684 ~ ~ 5806449 S~Vl~ ~ ~R 0.00 201.~5
1020 585321 05/01/01 529 ~ ~. ~E 6104800 ~ ~V 0.00 836.20
~020 585321 06/0~/0~ 529 ~ ~TI~, IE 6104600 ~0 ~VS 0.00 20.67
~ ~ 0.00 846.87
1020 585322 06/01/01 695 ~8~ ~ ~VI~ OF S 5806349 ~/V~I~ ~ 0.00 345.99
~020 585222 06/0~/02 695 ~ ~ S~VI~ ~ g 5606620
2020 585322 06/02/0~ 695 ~~V~ ~S 5606630 ~ 2000-2002 O~ ~C 0.00 906.46
1020 585322 06/0~/01 69S ~S~ ~ ~V~ OF S 5606620
~020 585322 06/02/0~ 695 ~ ~ S~ ~S S606620 ~ 2000-2002 O~ ~C 0.00 2S00.~9
'~'~ 0.00 3743~36
10 585323 06/01/01 698 T~Y'8 M~ZS~ 2708403 ~ ~ ~-x-~ ~ F 0.00 4324~,08
DATE 06/01/03. TIMR 09t55:10 -
1020 585325 06/01/01 .701 TAP-C~'F STORES 5506569 SUPPLXES/FO 22229 0.00 33.26
1020 585325 06/01/01 701 T~ ~5 5~06450 S~9~X~/~ 21~31 0.00 32.39
1020 585325 06/01/01 701 T~ ~ 5806349 SUPPLXES/~ 22240 0.00 21.36
1020 585325 06/01/01 T0I T~G~ S~ 5806349 ~X~/~ 22242 0.00 20.46
1020 585325 06/01/01 q0Z T~-~- ~ 5806349 SUP~X~/~ 222]4 o.oo 3V.~9
1020 585325 06/01/01 701 T~G~ ~ 5806349 ~P~X~/~ 22310 0.00 49.39
1020 585325 06/01/01 701 T~ ~S 5806349 SUP~X~/~ 22311 0.00 13.31
1020 585325 06/01/01 ?01 T~G~ S~R~ 5706450 S~X~/~ 21732 0.00 41.15
1020 585325 06/01/01 ~01 T~z' ~S 5806~49 ~P~X~/~ 161V9 0.00 84
1020 565325 06/01/01 701 T~~ 5606620 S~Z~/~ 16390 0.00 5V.80
1020 585325 o6/01/01 V01 T~ ~S 110664~ 8UPPLX~/~ 22254 0.00
1020 5B5325 0G/0l/0X ?01 T~G~ ~ 5806]49 5~P~X~/~ 22312 0.00
1020 5~5325 06/01/01 ~01 T~*- ~S 3~08404 ~F~X~/~ 10844 0.00 14S.TT
1020 585]25 06/01/01 ?01 T~** ~S 580644~ S~FLX~/~ 10844 0.00 24.82
1020 585325 06/01/01 ?01 T~- ~ 5806~49 ~F~X~/~ 22~19 0.00 35.2]
1020 585]25 06/01/01 701 T~' ~S 1106265 S~1~/~ 21219 0.00 ]8.22
102Q 585325 06/01/01 701 T~G~ ~ 5806349 ~P~IES/~ 16~25 0.00 93.23
1020 585325 06/01/01 701 T~S 5806449 ~1~/~ 14594 0.00 10.T9
1020 5~5325 ~G/01/01 701 T~ ~ 590~349 ~PPLX~/~ 16722 0.00 G0.3B
1020 585325 06/01/01 701 T~=~1 ~ 5806249 ~Z~/~ 22315 0.00 50.94
1020 585325 06/01/01 701 T~ ~ 1106265 S~1~/~ 22307 0.00
1020 595325 06/01/01 ~01 T~ ~ S806349 ~P~X~/~ 22320 0.00
1020 585325 06/01/01 701 T~ ~ 5806349 ~X~/~ 22~14 0.00
1020 585325 06/01/01 T01 T~ ~ 5806349 S~P~X~/~ 14093 0.00 36..
1020 585325 06/01/01 701 T~-~- ~ 5906349 ~P~X~/~ 16.734 0.00 229.8~
1020 585325 06/01/01 ~Ol T~ ~ S606620 S~1~/~ 16924 0.00 206.5~
1020 585325 06/01/01 701 T~ ~ 5606620 ~P~XES/~ 16914 0.0Q 116.88
1020 585~25 06/01/01 7Q1 T~ ~S 1106265 S~X~/~ 21216 0.0O 10.79
1020 585325 06/01/01 701 T~ ~S 5806449 ~PLIES/~ 14596 0.00 34.91
1020 585325 06/01/01 7Q1 ~ ~S 5806349 ~P~X~/PO 22267 0.00 2~.91
1020 585325 06/01/01 701 T~ S~R~ 5806349 S~X~/~ 22321 0.00 35.23
~020 585325 06/0~/0X 701 T~ ~ 5806349 ~XBS/~ 22313 0.00 49.71
~020 585225 06/0~/0~ 701 T~ ~ 5806349 sup~z~/~ 22242 0.00 25.53
1020 585~25 06/01/01 701 T~ ~S 5806349 S~PLX~/~ 22244 0.00 40.05
1020 585325 06/0~/0~ 70~ T~ ~ ~10626S S~P~X~/~ 212~1 0.00 43.15
~020 58S325 06/0~/0~ 701 T~ ~S 5806349 S~PLI~/~ 22324 0.00 27.90
1020 585325 06/01/01 701 T~ ~ 5806349 ~/~ 22222 0.00 35.23
1020 585325 06/01/0~ 701 T~ ~ 5806349 S~X~/~ 22236 0.00 49.29
1020 585325 06/01/01 701 T~~ 5806349 ~Z~/~ 22226 0.00 37.17
1020 585325 06/01/01 701 T~ ~ 5806349 ~X~/~ ~6712 0.00 198,43
~ ~g~ 0.00 2210.29
2020 58S326 06/01/01 ~08 ~~ 5806449 S~VX~ ~R~ ~ 0.00 207.00
1020 585327 06/01/01 V10 ~~ S806~49 S~I~ ~ ~ 0.00 8020.00
1020 585328 06/01/01 228~ ~Z~ 5806349 S~I~/~ ~6802 0.00 286.63
2020 585229 06/0~/02 1849 6-&'~1~ 1108408 D.~SK ~B 0.00 34,00
R~q DAT~ 06/01/01 TXI~ 09:55:12 - t~lNJ~lJ~ ACC~XMG
~6/01/0! CX'~'Y OF t'u'~IllO P~ 0
~C'COr,,~XHG ~IOD: 12/01 ~C~ ~X~ - DZ~ ~
~ ~Z~A: c~acc.c~l~be ~C~ "05/28/2001" a~ "06/01/2001'
~ - 110 - G~ ~
1020 S85330 06/01/01 ~001 ~, ~U 570 Dg~S~ RE~ O.00 250.00
1020 ~8~3~1 06/01/01 ~2; U S ~ ~SO6449 ~S 0.00 68.00
1020 S8533X 06/01/01 737 O S ~-~A ~806349 ~PS O.00 68.00
1020 585331 06/01/01 727 O · ~S~ S806249 ~PS 0.00 68.00
~ ~CK 0.00 204.00
1020 585332 06/01/0X 2226 ~X~ ~14S/RX~ 2708405 ~%ES P.O.10963 O.00 492.11
1020 585333 06/01/01 1959 v~ 1108S03 ~ A ~Z~ 0.0O 134.75
1020 585334 06/01/01 310 ~Zz~ Nx~ (~ 6z04800 ~v 4/12-5/11 05995840 0.00
1020 585334 06/01/01 ~Z0 ~XZ~ ~X~ {~ 1ZOVS01 ~V 4/12-5/~1 05995840 0.00 83.20
1020 585334 o6/o~/oz 310 ~x~ Mx~s (~ 1108201 s~v 4/12-5/11 05995840 0.00 83,20
1020 S85334 06/01/0S 310 ~X~ ~X~ (~ 5208003 ~V 4/12-5/11 05995840 0.00 41,58
1020 585334 06/01/01 310 ~z~M/p~.~q~ (~ 1108102 ~4/12-S/11 05995840 0.00 89.55
1020 ~85334 06/01/01 3Z0 ~X~ NXP~T.~ (~ 1101200 ~ 4/12-5/11 05995540 O.OO 54.01
lOgO 585334 06/01/01 310 ~Z~ MZ~ {~ 110VS03 ~V 4/12-5/11 0599S840 0.00 481.O9
lOgO 585334 06/01/01 310 '~I~MZR~S (~ 1108602 S~V 4/12-S/11 05995840 O.00 99,5~
1020 555334 06/01/01 310 ~Z~ MZ~ (~ 1108505 ~ 4/12-5/11 05995840 Q.00 107.35
1020 5~5334 0G/QX/0~ 310 ~X~ HX~ (~ 1108504 ~ 4/12-5/11 05995840 0.0O 303.48
1020 ~95334 06/01/01 310 ~X~MXP~.~S (~ 1108503 ~4/12-5/11 05995840 0.00 90.39
10' 585334 06/01/01 310 ~ ~1~ (~ 1108S01 ~ 4/12-5/11 ~5995640 Q.OG 387.34
~ ~ Q.0Q 1866.~
1020 585336 06/01/01 ~S0 VZS~ SnW~ M (~)' ~Z0 ~E 200~ V~S;OH Z~ 0.0~ 2098.S0
1020 585337 06/01/01 745 ~Z Z~ Z103500 ~ZT VS 6.0 SO~
2020 585335 0610~/0~ 754 ~ w~ 5806449 snv2~ ~ ~R 0.00 ~920.00
1020 585339 06/01/01 ~68 ~T ~ PA~ ~ ~01500 S~1RS 0.00
Z020 585340 06/01/01 775 ~ P~IFZC SI~ ~ 1108602 ~ 0,00 966.60
1020 585341 06/01/01 ?89 ~ ~X~ 1106248 ~TX~ ~ ~ O.O0 3591.88
1020 585342 06/0~/01 793 ~ ~ 5806249 S~ ~ ~R 0,00 1341,00
1020 585343 06/0~/01 ~001 ~, ~ 560 ~R~ 0.G0 149.00
~ ~H ~ 0.00 334499,61
~ ~ 0.QO 334499.61
~ ~RT 0.00 334499.61
RLTfi DATE 06/01/01 T'II~ 09:$5:3,2 - FTHANCZAZ, AC-C~;~lrx'x~G
KESOLUTION NO. 01-].27
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS PAYABLE IN THE AMOUNTS
AND FROM THE FUNDS AS HEREINAFTER DESCRmED FOR GENERAL AND
MISCELLANEOUS EXPENDITURES FOR THE PERIOD ENDING
JUNE 08, 2001
WHEREAS, the Director of Administrative.Services or her designated.
representative has certified to accura~ of the following claims and demands and to the
availability of funds for payment hereof; and
WHEREAS, the said claims and demands have been audited a~ r~luired by law.
NOW, THEKEFOKE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council hereby allows
the following claims and demands in the amounm and from the funds as hereinafter set
forth in Exhibit "A".
CERTIFIED:
Direcfor of Administrative Services
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Cupertino this day of ,2001, by the following vote:
Vote Members of the City Council
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST: APPROVED:
City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupertino
S~ '~ ~ ~X~ZA: tr~sact. C=a~_~te ~C~en '06/04/200Z' ~ "06/08/200~'
1020 585344 06/08/0~ M ~, ~ ~K 580 '~: ~eck - SPRZ~ 0.00 Z38.83
~020 S85345 06/08/01 H B~-H~Z~, ~Z~ 580 ~: ~eck - ~ 0.0O 100.00
1020 58534G 06/08/01 M ~, LZ~ S80
~020 585347 06/08/01 , ~Z, ~ S80 Ref~: ~ecA -RenC~i 0.00 S00.00
1020 S85348 06/08/02 M H~, HZ~O~ 580 Re~: ~ec~ - S~Z~ 0.00 S6. O0
1020 585349 06/08/01 H ~E, ~ S80 Xe;u~: ~ - S~Z~ 0.00 ~88.SS
1020 S85350 06/08/02 H LZ, F~ 580 ~: ~ecA - C~cel 0.00 SS.O0
~020 S853S~ 06/08/0~ H ~ ~, ~ SS0 Re;~: ~c~ - S~Z~ 0.00 320.00
1020 S85352 06/08/0~ K ~, ~ S80 ~: ~ecA - RenCaZ 0.00 S00.O0
1020 S853S3 06/08/01 M ~, ~Z 580 ~:
1020 S8S354 06/08/01 H RZD~, L;~ ~ 580 ~: ~eck - Renti~ 0.00 S00.00
~0; SSS3SS 06/08/0~ M ~, ~;~;~ SS0 h~: ~ec~ - S~Z~ 0.00 40.00
1020 S853S6 06/08/01 M V~ ~, D~ S80 Re~: ~eck - S~Z~ 0.00 196.00
1020 585357 06/08/01 1695 3M 1~08602 s~ Dz~ ~ 0.00 2338.02
~020 58S358 0G/08/0~ 2328 ~C S~VZ~ & D~z~ ~. 1108S05
~20 S85359 06/08/0~ M ~Xz~, LZG 58O Re;~: ~cA - Re~ 0.00 S00.00
ZO20 585360 06/08/01 H aT.n~Z~, ~, S80 ~: ~e~ - SPRZ~ 0.00 27.S0
1020 585361 06/08/01 8B8 ~ ~L ~A'~ ~ ~08502 ~H'L'~ ~Y 2001 0.00 122.60
1020 S85361 06/08/01 888 ~ ~L ~ I 1108501 ~-~-~ ~Y 2001 0.00 123.60
1020 585361 06/08/01 888 ~ ~ ~ Z 1108504 ~n-~-~ ~Y 2001 0.00 122.60
~ ~ECK 0.00 367.80
~020 S8S362 06/08/01 ~532 ~A*S D~m 22040~ ~T 01~ 0.00 2699.S0
Z020 S8S3G2 0G/08/0~ 1532 ~A-~-A'S ~~ 1103300 ~T ~ 0.00 559.63
~ ~ECK 0.00 3259.13
~020 S85363 0G/08/0Z g ~, ;Z~ S80 bf=: ~e~- ;~Z; 0.00 82.S0
Z020 S8S364 06/08/0Z 2330 ~Z~ Z~Z~ ~P 6308840 ~Z~ P.0.~0929 0.00 459.04
2020 S8S365 06/08/0Z ~00Z ~ ~-z ~X~ ~0820~ ~ ~Z~ D.~ 0.00 465.00
~T. ~ 0.00 860.00
DATE 06/07/01 TT~ 16:24;02 - FTILMJCY. AL ~
, ,.(--{I
T
06/07/01 CZTY O; f~F~';~O P~GF. 2
ACCO~liTXNG PSRXOD: Z2/0~
~-;~X~ ~X~XA:
~020 585366 06/08/0~ 57 ~ l~04S~0 ~E ~EE 0.00 102.55
~ ~ 0.00 833.25
~020 585367 06/08/0Z M ~, S~ S80 Re~un~: ~e=~ - Xen~a~ 0.00 ~00.00
~020 585368 06/08/0~ M ~, DZP~ 580 Xe~4: ~ec~- ~nta~ O.00 30.00
~020 595369 06/08/0~ ~002 B~, F~ & ~ ZZ0 ~D 45t ;;T.;~E OF BON 0.00 5625.00
Z020 585370 . 06/08/02 ~00 ~ Z~Z~ 8Y~'z~ Z~04300 ~ 2000'200~ OP~ ~C 0.00 Z363.~8
1020 58537~ 06/08/0~ 103 ~K ~Z~Z~ ~ ~104300 ~ 2000-200~ OP~ ~C 0.00 1703.60
~020 585372 06/08/01 ~001 B~Z~"; & I~Y IN~ ~0~510 ~ - ~YEE D~P 0.00 1330.00
1020 585373 06/08/0~ ~00~ ~-~
1020 5853?4 06/08/01 1948 ~-~P Z~Z~ IN Z106448 ~LZES P.O.16804 0.00 110.25
1020 585375 06/08/01 143 ~ ~I~Z~ [~ 1103400 S~VZ~ ~ ~ 0.00 3144.50
1020 585376 06/08/01 2336 ~ ~, INC. 6104800 ~ P.O.16522 0.00 4~
1020 58537? 06/08/01 152 ~:~1~Z~ ~TZON 1108101 ~ ~;V;S;~ ~ a~ 0.00 ~S0.22
1020 585378 06/08/0~ 155 ~ ~T.~=~ ~ER 1~08303 ~PLZ~S P.O.10982 0.00 46,98
1020 586379 06/08/01 ~00~ ~Y BQSIHE~ ~ZO 1108601 SUPP~Z~ P.O.16632 0.00 32.67
1020 585380 06/08/0~ 1057 ~D~ B~2TS S~VZC Z10 *~ ~ 0.00 281.51
1020 58538O 06/08/0~ 1057 ~ZD~ ~FITS S~VIC ~10 *~ DEP 0.00 173.09
~ ~ECK 0.00 454.60
1020 585381 06/08/0~ 1820 ~D~ ~ZTS S~C 1~0 ~ ~ ~Y 200~ 0.00 50.00
~020 585382 06/08/0~
1020 585383 06/08/0~ X ~, ~ZB 58O Re:~d: ~eck - ~ 0.00 60.00
~020 585384 06/08/0L X ~, ~ SOO bfq: ~ - S~:~ 0.00 02.00
1020 585385 06/08/01 ~001 ~, ~-P~ 550 ~ ~T.T.U~ ~ 0.00 20.00
1020 585386 06/08/01 ~001 ~ ~ 550 ~ ~ ~ 0.00 20.00
1020 585387 06/08/0~ H ~, ~ Y. 580 bfq: ~ck - S~ 0.00 49.00
2020 585388 06/08/02 2432 ~Z~'S DZS~Y G 5806349 ~ VZ;~TS 5/24 P.O.~G 0.00 272.00
~030 585389 06/08/0~ M ~Z~, ~ 580 h~: ~ ' ~ 0.00 49.
R~ ~ 06/07/0Z
CHECK !i0 ZSS'u'2 I~ .............. ~ ............. FL~ID/DSZ~ ..... D~SCRZPTXOli ...... S,~,t.~'8 TAZ ~
1020 585390 06/00/01 178 COX,C~XAX, LZ~ & ACCZD~ 110 XNS PX~ 6/1-6/10/01 0.00 66.75
1020 58539~ 06/08/02 1179 ~X~T ~103300 ~ ~ ~Y B~S~ 0.00 68.85
1020 585392 06/08/01 19X ~Z~ ~ OF ~ 1103300 ~ ~ZP ~ 0.00 82~.00
1020 5B5393 06/08/01 1058 ~TZ~ ~X~ S~V 2607404 R~ATX~ ~ O.00 6250.00
1020 5BS393 06/08/01 105B ~ ~ S~V 1107405 ~ P~ 0.00. ?S00.00
1020 585394 06/08/01 2~1 ~ D~ ~ O~ ~ 110 OB3 1519-002 0.00 4495.05
1020 SB5394 06/08/01 211 D~T~ D~ ~ OF ~ 110 ~P ~539-00L 0.00 340~.32
1020 585~ 06/08/01 211 ~ ~ ~ OF ~ 110 ~ 1519-003 0.00 6252.~4
1020 585400 06/08/01 ~43 ~ D~ 110
~020 S85401 06/08/01 ~ F~, ~ 580
1020 585402 06/08/01 260 ~~S ~ 1104510 ~$~S~VZ~ 0.00 4~.42
1020 585402 06/08/0~ 260 ~ ~ ~ 110 ~X~ 8~VI~ 0.00 18,60
1020 S85402 06/08/01 260 F~ ~ ~p ~10 ~ S~VZ~ 0,00 14.96
1020 585402 06/08/01 260 F~ ~S ~P 4239214 ~X~ S~ 0,00 17,04
1020 S85402 06/08/01 260 ~~S ~P 1108601 ~Z~S~VZ~ 0.00 14.96
1020 S85402 06/08/0~ 260 ~~[~ ~ 4239214 ~ S~VZ~ 0.00 11,9~
· 020 S85402 os/o8/ol 260 ~ ~ ~ 1101070 ~Z~ S~$~ 0,00 14,96
1020 585402 0G/08/01 260 ~~ ~P ~0~200
1020 S85403 06/08/0~ 2Sl ~ & v~ ~ ~ 1~0 CI~C P~ ~T ~ 0,00 17032.03
1020 S85404 06/08/01 2361 F~ ~ 110~000 ~ ~$~ 0.00 S,61
1020 585404 06/09/01 2361 FZ~~ 110~00 ~u~*'~ 0.00 23,19
1020 S85404 06/08/01 2361 FI~ ~ 1101000 ~-~-~ 0.00 8~,59
10. 585405 06/08/01 2361 F~~ 6104800 ~P ~-~l-~ 0,00 321.18
DATE 06/07/01 TXJ,~ lg:24:04 -
06/0~/01 ~XTY OF f~JPERTXNO PA~E 4
A~-'~XI~ PERZOD: 12/01 (:31EC'K REGXSTER - DXgBT. JRSE~HT ~
SELECTXGIq CRXTERZA: CransacC.Crarm_daCe between '06/04/2001' and '06/08/2001'
~ - 110 - GENERAL ~
CASH Af~-'T (~IECK HO XSS~ DT .............. VEHI)OR ............. FI]HI)/DBPT ..... DE~ZPTXOH ...... SALES TAX AMO;Jh*T
1020 585405 06/08/01 2361 FXR~T BAr,CARD 6104800 OUTLOOK BOOI~ 0.00 1V0.O0
1020 585405 06/08/01 2361 FXRSTBAHK~-ARD 6104800 SOFTMARE . 0.00 960.95
TOTAX,'~HRCK O.00 1352.13
1020 585406 06/08/01 2361 FZRb~TBAHKCARD 5606680 BLACkbERRY FARM PURi~HA' 0.00 81.23
1020 585406 06/08/01 2361 FXR~i' BAHK~-ARD 1101200 EMPLOYEE L~IEOH 0.00 2051.20
1020 585406 06/08/01 2361 FXR~T BAHKCARD 5806349 TEEH TRXP PUR(3IASES 0.00 329.05
TOTAL ~HECK 0.00 2461.48
1020 585407 06/08/01 2361 FXKST BANEChRD 1101200 SUPPI, XES 0.00 245.42
1020 S85407 06/08/01 2361 FXP~qT BANKCARD 1101200 DESSERTS R~qPLOYBE SERV ' 0.00 60.00
1020 585407 06/08/01 2361 FZI~T BA~K~,~RD 1101000 ~ BOOKS 0.00 120.98
~020 585407 06/08/01 2361 FZF~TBAHK~,RD 1103300 FLOMER~ 0.00 140.11
1020 585407 06/08/01 2361 FZRST BAHK(::ARD 1101031 ~'OOKXKS FOR TEL ~ MT 0.00 21.56
1020 585407 06/08/01 2361 FXKST BAHKCARD 1101201 SI~PPLZES 0.00 42.00
TOTAL (:HR~'I~ 0.00 630.07
1020 585408 06/08/01 M2001 G.g. #OLFK C(~ISTRUC'~*XOH 110 . KS~Bi~D RFI~I) 0.00 500.00
1020 S85409 06/08/01 H ~APATSY, ~OTA~ S80 ~efund: Check - SmeiER 0.00 27.00
1020 585410 06/08/01 281 GARDENLAHD 5606620 S~PPLZES P.O.16920 0.00 449.~v
1020 585410 06/08/01 281 ~RDR~.~qI(D 1108312 SIJPPLXES 9.0.23668 0.00 4!
TOTAL CHECK 0.00 494.-,
1020 585411 06/08/01 2237 GV~lt~d SPAN PR(~eJ~TS 1108314 TXNK AHD MATSRXAX~ NOT 0.00 21810.52
1020 585412 06/08/01 N2001 GREATER BAy ~ZRUCTX~ 110 45% XMPRVt~/T BG~DREI, E 0.00 4500.00
1020 585413 06/08/01 1535 HAXNKS & (:OMP~ XN~ 1104530 it~YERSE ~ DXREC~rOR 0.00 407.56
~020 585414 06/08/01 M HAW~ZES, Zllb-L*m 580 Re£und; Check - Renc&l 0.00 ~00.00
~020 5854~S 06/08/01 327 P~ DIRECT XHC 5606620 PARTS/S'dPPLZKS 0.00 304.59
1020 585416 06/08/01 1544 HRMI~T~ P~'KARD 1102403 3 HP BRIO pEHTXF~q XXX 0.00 4287.22
1020 585417 06/08/01 M HOLAVAHAHALLX, BIi:IMSBI~ 580 Refund: check * SPRX~ 0.00 56.00.
1020 585418 06/08/01 339 X~BO 1107501 (::L~S A J~RANN'dALD~E 0.00 195.00
1020 585419 06/08/01 343 X(:PlARBTlRE~I~T~'RTJST-45 110 *X(~4A 0.00 S939.SS
1020 585420 06/08/01 X242 X~STY-PRXFrS Z10~042 B. ~,_ARDS / C. ORR 0.00 54.14
X020 58542~ 06/08/01 353 Xit(~Iq(AJ~z'AXN 1104300 FY 2000-2001 OPE~ PI~C 0.00 220.64
1020 585422 06/08/01 354 J (3tAMI~D & ASSOCXA~S 1101200 BMPLOYBE REC:OGWX?XONA 0.00 762.~6
1020 585423 06/08/01 1969 GAXLd'E~SER 220401~ ~MOP, ROM'S LEM)ERS TOD 0.00 375
RtlH DATS 06/07/01 'TX~ 16t24s05 - FxHA~CXAL
-.
1020 585424 06/08/01 N ~'B(~, ]CY~ 580 ~t~d: ~ec~ - S~Z~ 0.00 1GS.O0
~020 SSS425 0S/0e/0~ 23?4
~ 0.00 1757.46
1020 5854~G 06/08/01 369 ~Y-~ ~I~ ~ ~NC ~08508 ~LI~/~ 23G~8 0.00 ~.G5
1020 S85427 0G/08/01 3?2 [I~'S l~ S?OG450 ~ P.O.2~740 O.00 22.G3
~020 S85428 06/08/01 ~237
~020 S8542~ 06/08/0~ 2302 ~3 l~. ~08~0~ ~VI~ ~ ~R 0.O0 88~.62
~020 SES430 06/08/0~ 385
~020 S8543~ 0G/08/0~ 2232 ~ ~IG ~lO ~ 0.00 306.50
1020 S8543~ 06/08/02 2232 ~ ~I~ ~0 B~ 0.0O 103.84
~0, 585432 06/08/01 H ~Z, ~ 580 Re~: ~eck - R~&i 0.0O 100.0O
~020 585433 06/08/0~ 43~ ~ ~-~-~S OFFI~ ~ ~083~5 ~ P.0.~22 0.00 28.S0
~020 5854~4 0g/08/0l ~00~ ~, ~ 5806349 ~g ~S ~l 0.00 49.00
2020 585435 06/08/0~ 444 H~'S ~ ~083Z5 ~Z~ P.O.Z0983 0.O0 Z~5.34
~020 585436 06/08/0~ H HZ~Z, ~ 580 ~et~: ~cX - S~ 0.00 ~0.00
~020 S8~43g 06/08/0~ ~ ~, ~ SB0 ~: ~ - 5~ 0.00 220.00
~020 S8544~ 06/0~/0~ H ~, ~Z S80 ~et~: ~ - 8~ 0.00 3~4.00
~020 58544~ 0G/08/0~ 302 ~Z~ ~ ~ Z~0 '~'~ DBF Q.00 26258.55
ZOO0 S85443 06/o8/0~ ~550
1020 58S444 06/08/01 ~00~ ~, ~ 550 ~-A-~ ~ZP 0.00 710.00
~0~ S85445 06/08/0~001 ~, ~ SS0 ~ ~~ZP 0.00 150.00
RT~4 DATE 06/0'//01 TZI~ 3.6:24:06 . F'I'H/tWCZAL ~
i
06/07/01 CZ'I~' OF CT~:~.?Z~O PAGE 6
S~Z~ ~ZT~ZA: ~r~ac~.~r~_~e ~t~ "06/04/2001" ~ "06/08/2001"
~020 585446 06/08/01 485 ~ ~FIC SZ~S ~108602 ~PPLI~/~ 10912 0.00 315.30
1020 585447 06/08/0~ 491 ~ ~I~ 6308840 ~PPLI~ P.O.~06~3 0.00 30.74
~020 S85448 06/08/0~ ~970 ~~ 22040t~ ~*S ~ ~D 0.00 375,00
~020 585448 06/08/0~ ~970 ~ ~S 22040~ ~T ~:~ 0.00 54.52
~ ~ 0.00
2020 585449 06/08/01 2094 O~n ~P~ INC., ~ ~108303 ~I~ P.0.22423 0.00 20.39
~020 585450 06/08/01 ~190 R~ O~ ~03500 S~VI~ ~ ~ 0.00 400.00
1020 585451 06/08/01 501 OP~ ~x~ ~3 11o ~z~ ~ 0.00 540.15
~020 s8s4s2 06/08/0~ ~00~ ~, ~ SSO ~e ~zp . 0.00 76.00
1020 585453 06/08/01 50~ ~ ~ ~:~ 1108501 ~R/~Z~ ' 0.00 476.44
lO20 585453 06/08/01 507 ~ ~ ~:~ 1108830 TI~ & ~ 0.00 1560.00
1020 S85453 06/08/01 507 ~ ~ ~:~ 1108830 TZ~ & ~Z~ 0.00 2187.93
~ 0.00 4224.2~
1020 585454 06/08/01 833 P g R S 110 P~ 1959 0.00 108.~
1020 585454 06/08/01 833 P E R S 110 ~ B~K 0.00 3'
1020 585454 06/08/01 833 P g R S 110 P~ ~Y 0.00 157..
1020 585454 06/08/01 833 P E R B 110 ~ 8~C 0.00 99.09
1020 585454 06/08/01 833 P E R ~ 110 *P~ B~K 0.00
1020 585454 06/08/01 833 P E R S 110 PK~ ~Y 0.00 22018.63
1020 S85454 06/08/01 833 P E R S 110 *P~ B~K 0.00 269.95
~ ~ 0.00 23142.64
1020 585455 06/08/01 508 P B R S - ~ 11~510 ~ 2001 ~ INS 0.00 24008.67
~020 585455 06/08/01 508 P E R S - H~ 1104510 ~ 2001 H~ INS 0.00 342.04
1020 585455 06/08/01 S08 P E R S - ~ 110 ~ 2001 H~ IHS 0.00 4418S.78
~ ~ 0.00 68536.49
1020 585456 06/08/01 511 P~1FZC B~ 6104800 S~V S/20-6/19 0.00 90.45
1020 585457 06/08/0~ 513 P~FZC ~ i s~15 ( 42o9~o ~ 4/28-s/30 0.00 41.98
1020 s85457 06/08/01 s13 P~ZFZC ~ i ~IC ( ~108505 E~C 4/20-S/25 0.00 2062.80
~0~0 585457 06/08/01 S13 P~ZFZC ~ & ~IC ( 1108505 · ~ 4/~6-5/29 ' 0.00 477.00
1020 585457 06/08/01 S~3 P~ZFIC ~ & ~IC ( S606620 ~ 4/30-S/31 0.00 1V.98
1020 585457 06/08/01 513 P~ZFZC ~ & ~C ( 4209110 ~C 4/28-5/30 0.00 148.83
· ~ ~CK 0.00 2748.59
1020 585458 06/08/0~ S33 ~ ~ '~-~ ~ ~ ~0 ~ L~/~ 2405 0.00 262.16
1020 S85459 06/08/01 S35 Fw~-~-DE ~ ~ 6308840 . ~l~/~ 10965 0.00 136.73
1020 585459 06/08/01 535 P~x~-~ ~ ~ 6308840 ~/~ 10965 0.00 36.18
~ 0.00
1020 585460 06/08/01 2388 F~&~'S ~~ 1~03300 ~ ~ S~ 0.00 455
DATE 06/07/01 TZMK 16.'24.*06 - FINANCL~L AO'J0r--_w:I'FZHG
06/07/01 CZTX 0r CUI)E]CI'IN0
ACCC)T,qqTTNG p~RTOD: 12/01 CH~CK It~TST~R - D2SBUP. S~v~s~T ~
CASH ACCT CH~CX NO ISSUE DT .............. VEH~OR ............. FT.~D/DEPT ..... DESCRXPTTON ...... S~v.mc TAX
1020 585461 06/08/01 M PHAM, XUX~ 580 Re£ufld: C~eck - S~RMER 0.00 275.00
1020 585462 06/08/01 542 PlliE CONK ~ER 1108503 SUPPLZES/FO 10918 0.00 183.82
1020 S85462 06/08/01 542 PZNR ~ L~4BER 1108315 S~JPP~,2RS P.O.10968 0.00 328.22
"1'01'A~ CHECK 0.00 512.14
1020 585483 06/08/01 2315 PXVO'I' Z,~GAXOR, S 1104200 AERC~q CHAXR, ZHCLr.~XNG 0.00 314.53
1020 585463 06/08/01 2315 PZVO~ Z~,-~AZORS 1104100 AERON CHAZR, IN(::~,~)ZNG 0.00 314.92
TO'I'AL CHECK 0.00 525.85
1020 585464 06/08/01 M 1~3o STRIDER 580 Re£und: Check - SPRZNG 0.00 136.00
1020 585465 08/08/01 576 ~RRCJ & GRAHAM ZNC 4249210 PROFESSIOHAL SERVICK~ 0.00 232.50
1020 585466 06/08/01 581 RELXA~LE 1104300 SOPPLXES/PO 12065 0.00 147.34
1020 58546? 06/08/01 590 R~CKVOSS'I"P. UCKZNG ZHC 5208003 TRU(:3CXHG COMPOST ~ 20 o.oo 7oo.oo
1020 585468 06/08/01 610 S & s MORLI)MZDE 5806349 .SOPF'L~ES/PO 16803 0.00 310.15
1020 585472 06/08/01 625 SAN dOSE J/ATERC(:~4PA)~' 1108314 IIA3'~J~SERVZCE 4/30-5/2 0.00 643.10
102 585472 06/08/01 62S SAS,TO SE #ATBP. COHPAF/ 1108312 HArm( SBRVZCK 4/30-5/2 0.00 1500.99
102, 5854?2 05/08/01 62S SA~OSB MA~B~. CO,ANY 1108407 Mkt&a~ SKRV~CK 4/30-5/2 0.00 56.23
1020 5854?2 06/08/01 625 SAN ~OSB WA'Z'SX C(~4~Mr~ 1108312 WATER SERVZCE 4/30-S/2 0.00 1155.95
1020 5854?2 06/08/01 62S SAN dO~R #A'I'~RCOMPAHY 1108407 HAT~$ERVZCE 4/30-5/2 0.00 94.10
1020 585472 06/08/01 625 SA~OSE #ATER COMPANY 1108407 WA'L'J~( SBRV/CK 4/30-5/2 0.00 60.86
1020 585472 06/08/01 625 SMiJO~E #ATERCOMPAHY 1108407 WATBRSKRVZCK 4/30-5/2 0.00 26.96
1020 5854?2 06/08/01 625 SAH OOSB #A'I~R COHPAHY 110840? #~ac SERVICE 4/30-S/2 0.00 18.28
1020 S85472 06/08/01 625 SAN~OSBWA~C(~4PANY 1~08407 IG~L*~ASERV/C~ 4/30-S/2 0.00 25.51
1020 585472 06/08/01 625 SAH~TOSE WA'~BR COMPAHY 1108407 #A~'ER SERVZCE 4/30-5/2 0.00 15.87
1020 585472 06/08/01 625 SAN,T O SE WATER COt4PA/n' 110840? WATER SERVZCK 4/30-5/2 0.00 8.85
1020 5854?2 08/08/01 625 SAN~TOSB #ATBR COMPA,qY 1108407 #A-~-~A SBRVZf.'B 4/30-5/2 0.00 25.55
1020 5854?2 06/08/01 625 SAN,]OSEWATER COMPAHY 1108407 ~IL~SnVZ~ 4/30-5/2 0.00 164.93
1020 585472 06/08/01 625 SA~TO~B WA'I'BR COMPANY 1108407 Mk~ac SERVZCK 4/30-5/2 0.00 138.91
1020 5854?2 06/08/01 625 SAH u'OSB WA'I'F,q CC~4PA~Y 1108312 #k~( SBRVIC~ 4/30-5/2 0.00 400.S$
1020 585472 06/08/01 625 SAN4OSE WATER C01~ANY 1108407 #A-~-f~K SERYZCE 4/30-S/2 0.00 75.74
1020 585472 06/08/01 625 ~ u'OSE WATBR COMI)ANY 5708S10 #A*I'BR SKRVZCE 4/30-5/2 0.00 275.94
1020 585472 06/08/01 625 SAN~OSEWA'I'BR (~ANY 1108312 WA-~-~A SE~V~C'B 4/30-S/2 0.00 690.80
1020 5854?2 06/08/01 625 SAH dOSE WATBR (::0MI)ANY 1108408 WA-A-~A SBRVZCK 4/20-5/2 0.00 25.00
1020 5854?2 06/08/01 625 ~AMd-OSB WATER COM~AHY 1108504 NA'I'BR ~ERVICE 4/30-5/2 0.00 73.57
1020 585472 ' 06/08/01 625 SAN~TOSBWATI~iCOM~ANY 1108S04 WA-~'m( SmWZCE 4/30-5/2 0.00 85.14
1020 585472 06/08/01 625 SAN JOBB WATER CONPANY 1108303 WA-~'~,K SBRV~CE 4/30-5/2 0.00 83.69
1020 585472 06/08/01 625 SA~ O(~ WA'I~R COM1)ANY 1108303 WA%'~,K SERVICE 4/30-5/2 0.00 2029.63
1020 5854?2 06/08/01 625 SAN~O~B WATBR (:014PANY 110840? WATER 8ERVZCK 4/30-5/2 0.00 68.87
1020 S85472 06/08/01 525 SAN4OSB WATBR C~I4PANX 5606620 #ATBR snvzcK 4/30-5/2 0.00 146.14 ·
1020 58s472 06/08/01 625 ~ JOBB WATER (:XI4PAIIX 1108321 WA'l"usl SBRVZCE 4/30-5/2 0.00 36.S0
1020 S85472 06/08/01 625 SA~GOSEWA'I'BR COMPANY 1108321 WA'I'BRHBRV'ZCE 4/30-5/2 0.00 38.S0
1020 S85472 06/08/01 625 SAN dOEE WATBR C01~ANY 1108314 WA'I'BR BBRVICE 4/30-5/2 0.00 103~.37
1020~. 585472 06/08/01 825 SAN OO~B WAteR COHPANY Z108321 #A~'~R ~ERVZCK 4/30-5/2 0.00 177.53
102 585472 06/08/01 625 &AN40~EWATSRC~MPAb'Y 1108315 WATBRS~CE 4/30-5/2 0.00 1857.86
$
R',Aq DATB 06/07/01 TZME 16z24:08 - ~'ZHA~AL ~
06/07/01 CITY OF ~?INO PAGZ 8
ACCOI.qiTII~G PERIOD: 12/01 CI~CK REGISTER - DI~ ~
1020 5854~2 06/06/01 625 ~ ~ ~ ~ 1108315 MA~ S~VX~ 4/30-5/2 0.00 115.60
1020 5954~2 06/08/01 625 ~ G~B ~ ~ 1108~14 MAY~ S~VZ~ 4/30-S/2 0.00 889.43
1020 5854~2 06/08/01 625 ~ ~E MA~ ~ . 1108407 ~A~R SERVX~ 4/30-5/2 0.00 1509.~0
1020 5~54T2 06/08/01 6~5 ~E MA~ ~ 110840~ ~R S~VZ~ 4/30-5/2 0.00 1289.26
10~0 S854V2 06/08/01 62~ ~ G~ ~P~ 5606640 MA~ S~X~ 4/30-5/2 0.00 29~.~1
1020 S854~ 06/08/01 G2~ ~E MA~ ~ 110~15 MA~ ~VX~ 4/30-5/2 0.00 3G.S0
1020 S854T2 0G/08/01 625 ~B MA~ ~ 1108315 MA~ S~VZ~ 4/30-5/2 0.00 2133.02
1020 5854~2 06/08/01 G2S ~ MA~ ~ 110B~15 MA~ ~VX~ 4/30-5/2 0.00 63.36
1020 5854T3 06/08/01 625 ~ ~E MA~ ~ 110840~ ~&~ ~VX~ 4/30-5/2 0.00 30.50
1020 5854~2 06/09/01 62~ ~ ~ ~ 110840~ MAY~ S~RVI~ 4/30-S/2 0.00 30.S0
1020 5854~2 06/08/01 62~ ~ GOSE ~ ~P~ 1X0~506 MAWR SERVZ~ 4/30-5/2 0.00
1020 5854~2 06/08/01 625 ~ ~ ~ ~P~ 110840V ~AT~ S~VX~ 4/30-5/2 0.00 1.65
2020 5854~2 06/08/01' 625 ~ ~E ~A~R ~ 1108504 · NA~ S~VZ~ 4/30-5/~ 0.00 9.00
1020 5854~2 06/08/01 625 ~~ ~ 110840~ ~S~V~ 4/30-5/2 0.00 60.86
1020 5854?2 06/08/01 625 ~ ~ ~ 1108407 ffA~ ~VZ~ 4/30-5/2 0.00 12.50
1020 585472 06/08/01 625 ~ g~ ~ ~ 1108407 ~A~ S~VZ~ 4/30-5/2 0.00 12.50
1020 5854~2 06/08/01 625 ~ ~ NA~ ~P~ 1108407 HA~ SBRVZ~ 4/30-5/2 0.00 92.3~
1020 585472 06/08/01 625 ~ G~ G~ ~ 1108407 G~ S~VZ~ 4/30-S/2 0.00 16.84
1020 S85472 06/08/01 625 ~ ~B ~A~ ~ 5606620 G~ S~VZ~ 4/30-5/2 0.00 38.V6
1020 5854?2 06/08/01 625 ~B WA~ ~ 1108506 G~ H~VZ~ 4/30-5/2 O.00 3~.0~
2020 585472 06/08/01 625 ~ G~ ~ 1108407 ~A~ S~VZ~ 4/30-5/2 0.00 12.S0
1020 585472 06/08/01 625 ~g G~ ~P~ 1108407 NA~ S~VI~ 4/30-S/2 0.00 24.0~
1020 585472 06/08/01 625 ~4~ ~ ~P~ 1108407 ffA-z-~ S~V~ 4/30-5/2 0.00
1020 5854~2 0G/08~01 625 ~ ~B ~ ~ 5606620 ~R S~VI~ 4/30-5/2 0,00
1020 585472 06/08/01 625 ~ ~ ~ ~P~ 5606620 ~ S~VZ~ 4/30-S/2 0.00 218.42
1020 585472 06/08/01 625 W J~E G~ ~P~ 1108407 G~ SnVZ~ 4/30-S/2 0.00 3~.73
1020 585472 06/08/01 625 W~E NA~ ~ ~08S0S ~ SnVZ~ 4/30-5/2 0.00 9.00
1020 585472 06/08/01 625 ~E MA~ ~ 5708510 ~ ~Z~ 4/30-5/2 0.00 189.5~
ZD20 585472 06/08/01 625 ~G~E NA~ 1108303 HA~ SnVZ~ 4/30-S/2 0.00 142.96
1020 5854?2 OG/08/O~ 625 W~ G~ ~ 1108303 G~ ~V~ 4/30-S/2 0.00 S8S.S?
1020 S85472 06/08/01 62S W~ ~ ~P~ 1108303 HA~ SnV~ 4/30-S/2 0.00 1454.32
~020 SSS4?2 os/08/0~ 625 W ~E HA~ ~P~ 1108503 MA~ S~VZ~ 4/30-S/2 0.00 164.64
1020 585472 0G/08/0~ 625 W~B ~A~ ~P~ 1108505 HA~ S~V$~ 4/30-5/2 0,00 223.91
1020 585472 06/08/01 625 W~E HA~ ~ 1108407 MA~ S~Z~ 4/30-5/2 0.00
1020 585472 0G/08/0Z 625 ~B MA~ 1108314 G~ S~VZ~ 4/30-S/2 0.00 24?.03
1020 585472 06/08/01 625 ~ ~ G~ ~ 1108314 ~ S~Z~ 4/30-S/2 0.00 216.68
Z020 S85472 06/08/01 625 ~ ~ ~ ~P~ 1108507 ~ S~VZ~ 4/30-S/2 0.00 7~.13
1020 585472 06/08/01 625 W~K G~ ~ 1108314 HA*~-~ S~Z~ 4/30-S/2 0.00 943.76
1020 5854?2 06/08/0~ 625 W~B Mk3'~ ~ 1108314 ~A~ S~VI~ 4/30-5/2 0,00 870.04
1020 585472 06/08/01 6~5 ~ MA~ ~ 1108302 N~ S~VZ~ 4/30-5/2 0.00 S05.78
~020 SSS4?2 06/08/0~ 625 ~ ~ ~'~ ~ 1108314 G~ SnVZ~ 4/30-5/2 0.00 ?68.60
Z020 585472 06/08/01 62S ~ ~ G~ ~ 1108314 G~ ~VZ~ 4/30-5/2 0.00 9.00
1020 5854?2 06/08/01 625 ~B ~ ~ S708510 MA~ SnVZ~ 4/30-5/2 0.00 9.00
Z020 585472 06/08/01 625 ~ MA~ ~ 1108407 ~' a~;~ 4/30-5/2 0.00 20.07
~ ~ 0,00 24701.16
1020 585473 06/08/01 626 ~ ~ ~ D;~ ~ R 1102100 C~TA~8 4-200~ 0.00 2385.00
Z020 S8S4?4 06/08/01 2222 ~A~~A 1101500 ~ ~ 0.00 20.00
Z020 585475 06/08/01 2057 ~C~ 5606620 1~TZ~ ~ g 0.00 324.
1020 S85476 06/08/01 1449 S]~(XOR ADQ~TS TdEGAL~! 260?404 i~EZI~ FOR SRVS1/1-3/31 0.00 1625.00
1020 585477 06/08/01 M SHNIMA, RAG~AV 580 Refund: Check - SPal~ 0.00 .220.00
1020 5854~8 06/08/0X ~00Z S~, ~ XX0 D~ ~X~ ~ 0.00 659.04
X020 S85479 06/08/01 M S~, ~-~ 580 Re~d: ~ec~ - ~ 0.00 Z00.00
1020 585480 06/08/0~ H ~, ~-~ 580 ~: ~eck - ~ 0.00 110.00
X020 585481 0G/08/0X 2383 S~LX~VAT~.~X~ ~ 110 1~ ~ ~00~/2002 0.00 60613.34
1020 S85482 06/08/01 M S~, ~X S80 ~: ~ec~ - ~ 0.00 55.00
~020 585483 06/08/01 H SXV~, V~X 580 ~: ~eck - ~ 0.00 52.00
1020 585484 06/08/01 H SX~, V~X 580 Re~: ~ck - S~ 0.00 3.00
X02O 585485 06/08/0:2065 SEX~S~ 5806249 ~ 8/15/01-XR~XH 0.00 149.00
xo20 585455 os/08/0x 2065 SKX~A~ ~ ~106100 ~ 8/15/01-~ 0.00 149,00
~ 0.00 298.00
XO2v 585486 06/08/01 M' ~, ~ 580 ~: ~k - S~X~ 0.00 110.00
~020 S85487 06/08/01 665 S~ ~Y ~:'~LXT~ 5806449 S~VX~ ~ ~R 0.00 2644.00
~020 585488 06/08/01 ~954 S~ ~TX~ 1104510 g G~ ~/E 5/13 0.00 1181.25
~020 585488 06/08/01 ~954 S~XW ~?X~ 11045~0 ~ G~R~ W/E 5/20 0.00 945.00
~ ~ 0.00 2126.25
1020 S85489 06/08/01 669 S~Y ~T 2708404 ~LX~/~ 10991 0.00 344.68
1020 585490 06/08/01 1090 ~OF~X~ 1104300 ~ ~ ~-*-~ 0.00 300.00
~020 585491 06/08/01 1090 ~A~ ~ OF ~T ~04300 ~ ~ ~ A~ 0.00 300.00
~020 S85492 06/08/01 677 ~ ~ ~ A ~ 110 *~ ~F 0.00 1937.56
1020 585493 06/08/01 2369 ~ ~ A ~T 2709449 S~X~ ~ ~ 0.00 2217.43
X020 585494 06/08/01 686 ~ 2~010 ~ 2000-2001 OP~ ~ 0.00 750.00
1020 585495 06/08/01 1825 G~XW~X~X~ 6308840 P~ P.0.10984 0.00 196.45
1020 S85496 06/08/0~ 695 S~ ~ ~ OF S 5806349 ~uF~ ~ ~ ~ 0.00 1347.85
1020 565497 06/08/01 ~00 T.Y. ~ ~Z~ 1103300 ~X~ 0.00 7~9.00
X02~ S85498 06/08/01 696 ~ ~Y 1106506 P~/~X~ 0.00 127.85
~ DA'E~ 06/0';/01 TT, J~ 16:24:10 o FXHAHCXAL A~:0U~fTIHG
..
'~6/07/01 c'rTY OF ~Jt~R'Z'ZNO PAGE lQ
~INT'XIIG PERIOD: 12/01 CHECK RBGTSTI~. - DZSBTJI~T ~
~BT,~C'X'TON C:~.TT~RTA: ~.~'a3~&cC.r.~anM_daCe bml;veen "06/04/2001" arid "06/08/2001"
P'u-dD - 110 - G~ ~
~t~,SH AC~'X' CHECK 140 XS-qUE ~ .............. VE~ ............. L~/DEPT ..... Dt~SCKZL:)TXOH ...... SAT,I~C: TAX AMC~
].020 585495 06/08/0'] 1520 TAHIC PRC~E~'r EHGXNBR:R~rNG 1108503 ~T-TC: MORKS ~N'X3~.A~ 0.GO 12877.07
'].020 585499 06/08/0'1 1520 TA.]C PP.~C'T ~(:a~'H~'RXN(~ 1108503 Ir,,J~LTC #C]RX~ CC)h'TRACF 0.00 1322.53
TOTAL CHECK 0.00 24000.00
1020 585500 06/08/01 M2001 TARGET CORP 110 FNL 10*w XMFRVt~ 13HD R 0.00 2150.00
1020 585500 06/06/01 H2001 'FARGIffT CORP 110 D~BLDp~,S HAZNT ~ R 0.Q0 590.84
't~TAL ~IECI( 0.00 2740.84
2020 585501 06/08/01 M2001 TARGET $I~TALTY ~ 1108201 MP. KSHP/S EMPL ~ 27, 0.00 175.00
1020 585102 08/08/01 M THYSEH, S~;-z'x' 580 ReFund: Check - ~ 0.00 12,00
1020 S85503 06/08/01 1993 ~$AStJRER OF ~ CO~ 110 A LOPEZ u'9. 566398126 0.00 161.54
1020 S85504 06/08/01 2226 T~Z:L3'~U RB~'~ALS#145/liXGHM 8308840 b'*UI)PLXES P.O.10987 0.00 222.00
1020 585505 06/08/01 1154 T.~TTE~ MAY OP SANTA ~ 110 T3HXTED MAY 0.00 142.25
1020 585505 06/08/01 738 VAT.T.~y OTT* COMPANY 6308840 IPY 2000'2001 OPEN PURC: 0.00 4756.97
1020 585506 06/08/01 738 V~v.v.uy OTL CC3KPAHY 6308840 FY 2000-2001 OPEN PT3?.C: 0.00 340.56
TOTAL CHXCK 0.00 5137.5,4
1020 58550? 06/08/01 1926 VERXFOHE ZHC 5606640 CC ~4AC:HXNE P. OLS,S/PO 12 0.00 2?
1020 585507 06/08/01 1926 VENTF(X4E THC 1104000 CC HACH:~HE ROT.T~C/]PO 12 0.00
TOTAL CHECK 0.00 S4.20
1020 58SS08 06/08/01 745 VMX THC 1103S01 RQT. T~P IUiTL/PO 15420 0.00 464.40
1020 585509 06/08/01 1508 ,.?OSEPH H MALTOH 1108603 ~BXNE-BX]CK 'lC) NOR]C NEE 0.00 1084.99
1020 58S$10 06/08/01 2364 NATEP. SA~b-A'X' ~ S606620 FILETGHT, SHTpp:ZNG AH~ 0.00 118.65
1020 S85510 06/08/01 2364 MA'/'BL~ SAFETY PP. QDTJC'L'S S506449 RBSC'TJR TT.1BRS RESCUE 'L'U 0.00 '606.71
1020 585510 06/06/01 2364 NA'I'E~ SA~=~'~ PROD~"'L'S S606620 i~SC~R 'L'UBRS I~,~C~E ~ 0.00 282.01
1020 585510 06/08/01 2364 #ATE*q. SA.I°~TY ~P*0DO~"TS 5806445 SUPPLXES/PO 16805 0.00 114.56
TOTAL f~IECK 0.00 '1222.33
1020 5655~.1 06/08/01 ?66 MES'F RAY STY.~4P ilEMOVAL X 1108408 b~TT,.~4P GRXHI)THG SENvxr'E 0.00 965.00
1020 585512 06/05/01 ?'/4 MEa-Z'~,~.d iiXGL*MA¥ PR~OtrCT$ 2708804 ST.,'PPLXES/PO 10853 0.00 55.00
1020 58551'~ 06/08/01 143001 #XN'X"BRS, PA'X3tTCXA 5806349 RAT PRESm*~T 7/10 0.00 155.00
1020 585514 06/08/01 1939 WXP~T-mu~ & KELLY C:ONSTJLTZ 2709443 PUBLXC #ORKS ~ 0.00 5968.79
1020 S8SS15 06/08/01 551 NCX)LM(31TH HU~L~ENy 1108303 SUPPZ,XEN P,O.10985 0.00 95.?'/
1020 585516 06/08/01 '/94 XBRG~ ~0Bl~l~ATl0el 2104310 FY 2000-2001 OPRH ~ 0.00 99'/.14
1020 585516 06/08/01 '/94 XBRf~C COP.~RATZC3H 1104310 FY 2000-2001 C)~m ~ 0.00 1313.28
TO~AL CHECK 0,00 23~0.42
1020 S85517 06/08/01 H ]CO, FET 580 Re£,,~4~ Check o
Rt3~ DATK 05/07/01 TXI~ 16:24:10 ~ FXliAI4CZAL A~XtlG
1020 585518 06/08/01 H yAMATAKE, HXNKO 580 Refund: (~eck o FU~L R 0.00 SS.00
2020 585519 06/08/01 H yN, IATAIC~, HINBO 560 Refund: Check - ~ R 0.00 16.50
1020 585520 06/08/01 H YAH, ~Z SB0 ~: ~eck - S~R 0.00 55.00
LO20 565521 O6/0B/0~ ~001 Y~. S~ 550 ~F ~T.T.,,~ ~CZ~ 0.00 20.00
~020 585522 06/o8/o~ H YZ, ~ SSO Re~: ~ck - Recu~ 0.00 100.00
~020 585524 06/0~/02 805 ~ ~Z~Z~ ~ 4209534
L020 58S524 06/08/0~ B05 ~T ~Z~Z~ ~ 2909449 ~VZ~ ~ ~ 0.00 230~.00
Z020 S85524 06/08/0Z 805 ~T ~ ~ 4209535 ~ ~ ~ PRO~ 0.00 ~006.6~
~020 S.5524 06/08/0~ e0S ~T ~Z~Z~ ~ 4209529 ~VZ~ ~ ~ 0.00 ~??.O0
2020 58SS24 06/08/0Z 805 ~T ~Z~Z~ ~ 4209S25 ~DZTZ~ ~ W 0.00 75.79
~020 58552& 06/08/0~ B0S ~T ~Z~Z~ ~ 2?09448 ~VZ~ ~ ~R 0.00 2028.00
2020 585524 06/08/02 805 ~T ~ ~ 2709440 ~VZ~ ~ ~ 0.00 595.00
1020 585524 06/08/02 805 ~T ~Z~ ~ 1108601 ~ ~ ~S 0.00 1453.87
~020 S85524 0S/08/0Z 805 ~T ~l~Z~ ~ 2709531 ~LXC NO~ ~ 0.00 838.95
~020 585524 06/08/0~ 805 ~T ~ ~ 4209527 ~ZC ~ ~ 0.00 7S.79
~020 58S524 06/08/0~ 805 ~T ~ ~ ~0860~ ~ ~ ~ 0.00 Z899.50
102 585524 06/08/0~ 805 ~T ~Z~ ~ 1108601 S~VX~ ~ ~R 0.00 XOS.00
102~ 585524 06/08/0~ 805 ~T ~Z~S~ ~ 4209528 ~IC ~ ~ 0.00 1549.56
1020 585524 06/08/01 805 ~T ~ ~ 4209537
1020 585524 06/08/01 805 ~T ~l~l~ ~ 4209116 ~ZC ~ ~ 0.00 4643.92
~020 585524 06/08/0~ 805 ~T ~l~l~ ~ 4209538 S~VI~
~020 585524 06/08/0~ 805 ~T ~l~l~ ~ 4209524 LZ301998 0.00
1020 585524 06/08/01 805 ~T ~X~X~ ~ 2709438 ~DZTX~ ~ ~ 0.00 560.00
x020 585524 os/os/ox 805 ~T ~XH=~ ~ 4209539 S~X~ ~ ~ 0.00 856.11
1020 585524 06/08/01 805 ~T ~X~X~ ~ 4209536 S~VX~ ~ ~ 0.00 913.19
X020 58S524 06/08/0X 8O5 Z~T ~X~Xm ~ 2709436 X~024 S/H/B ~ P.O 0.00 105.00
X020 585524 06/08/0X 805 ~T ~X~ ~ 4209116 S~VX~ ~ ~R 0.00 140.00
· 020 585524 0;/08/0X 805 ~T ~X~X~ ~ 2709443 ~vx~ ~ ~a o.oo 2578.oo
~ ~CK 0.00 25385.98
~ ~H ~ 0.00 438397.81
~ ~ 0.00 438397.81
~ RE~RT 0.00 43839~.81
DATE 06/09/01 TIME 16:24:11 - FXHAHCXAL A;.~,AmTXHG
RESOLUTION NUMBER o1-128
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS PAYABLE IN THE AMOUNTS
AND FROM THE FUNDS AS HEREINAFTER DESCRmED FOR SALARIES
AND WAGES PAH~ ON
June 6, 2001
WI~REAS, the Director of Adr~inistrative Sen, ices, or their designated representative
has certified to the accuracy of the following claims and demands and to the availability of funds
for payment hereof; and
WHEREAS, the said claims and demands have been audited as required by law;
NOW; THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council hereby allows the
following claims and demands in the amounts and from the funds set forth:
GROSS PAYROLL $382,887.61
Less Employee Deductions $(118,854.30)
NET PAYROLL $264.033.31
Payroll check numbers issued 54043 through 54289
Void check number 53797 through 54042
D~'~tor of Admini-~trative Sorvices
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Cupertino this __ day of ,2001, by the following vote:
Vote Members of the City Council
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST: APPROVED:
City Clerk Mayor, City of Cuperlino
..~ City Hall
10300 Torte Avenue
95014-3255
..- ~,~,-,
777-3262
CITY 0F FAX: (408) 777-3366
CUPERTINO
SUMMARY
Agenda Item ~ Date: June 18, 2001
Subject: Recommendation to approve the addition of article XVI to the League of California
Cities' bylaws relating to the establishment of a Grassroots Network.
Background: The past two decades have seen a significant growth in state government. A recent
report by The California Budget Pwject indicated that between the state budget years of 1977-78
and 2000-2001 state general fund spending grew 574 percent (from $11.7 billion to $78.8
billion). Unadjusted for inflation, this is an average of 25 percent per year. These figures include
the backfill to local governments from the recent cut/n the Vehicle License Fee. State budget
growth has frequently come at the expense of local revenues and local authority.
Combine term limits with the historical disadvantage cities have had in their financial
relationship with the state, and it is clem- that a new model for competing and advocating in
Sacramento is necessary. Many organizations have responded by investing in a stronger
grassroots orgn-i?ation. The League of California Cities (the League) proposes to respond in
kind to this new climate by building a grassroots network to coordinate city officials' efforts
locally to influence legislators, their staff, community groups and the news media.
18 months in the planning, the Grassroots Network would consist of l0 field offices and 17 staff.
Through education, orgnni=~tion and advocacy, these staff would increase the impact of the
League's 16 regional divisions and the knpact of city officials on the state legislature's and
governor's decisions affecting cities.
Financial Implications: The additional cost to the city will be $4,643, bringing total League
dues to$13,487. If approved by two-thirds of the cities voting, the effective date of the dues
increase is July 1, 2001.
Recommendation: Approve the addition of article XVI to the League of California Cities'
bylaws. While the proposed fees represent a 52 percent increase over previous years, this
additional cost represents a minor expense in relation to potential lost revenue and the impact of
the many significant issues debated and advocated in Sacramento.
by: ( . Approved for submission:
Rick Kitson David Knapp
Public Information Officer City Manager
Grassroots Network Overview
City officials have experienced dccp frustration ~ recent years as the state govemment has amassed mom resources and
power at the expense of local govemment smvices. The League has a solid mputa~on as an advocate of city interests, but in
t~e new em of term limits, traditional lobbying methods are ofmn a poor match for gmssroots campaigns and financial
contrbutbns by other competing interests. Many o,~i.,aiens have already responded to I~e new political reality in Sacra-
mento by investing in a stronger gmssroots organization, including the powerful education lobby, which recently launched a
new, high profile and well-funded gmssrools organiza~3n called EdVoice. The League now has to respond in kind to ~is new
climate by building a solid grassmols network to coordinate city officials' eff-~ls locally to influence legislatom, ~heir staff,
potentially helpful community groups, and the r=~.'.'s media.
Major Elements
The Network would consist of 10 field offices that would be staffed by 14 new and 3 exisling staff (15 coordina~om/2 support).
The coordinators would work with city officiab and the regionaJ divisions of the League to promote key League legislative
priorities with legislatom, club;ct staff, local media and other supporting community groups. They would arrange meetings,
plan news conferences, organize letter writing and media campaigns, and coordinate grassroo~ efforts with community
groups wi~ similar agendas. In short, they would increase the impact of the League's 16 regional divisions and the already
The Network would cost cities an additional $1.6 million each year in dues. This is ~e equivalent of four one hundrecl~.s of
one percent (0.04%) of the $3.8 billion cities collect each year in sales and use taxes, and about one ta,',h of one percent of
the $1.57 billion cities receive each year In VLF revenues. Most observers believe both revenue sources could become
victims of legislative aids in the next recession. Individual city costs forthe Network will vary depending on city population. For
example, a city of 50,001 to 60,00Opopulation would pay an addraonal $4,643. Such a dues increase will require amendment
of the League bylaws approved by no less than 2/3 of the ~-~g League membership.
M~..be,=hip Review
The idea of the Gmssro~ Network o 'ng~ated with. ~e City Managers Deparlment and was mom fully developed by a
spedal Task Force appointed by the League board of directors. Infom~ation on Ihe program was dewloped and disseminated
to the full League leadership ( board, divisions, deparl~ policy consniltees and caucuses), as well as to every city
manager. Dozens of pr~sentations on the proposal were made to each League division, many deparlmen'~, and to most of
the ama city manager grouPS throughout ~e state.
Accountability to the
Based upon membership input, ~e Task Force recommended, and the board adopted, signacant changes to the original
proposal. These include: establishing long-term goals, annual program objectives, and regular reports to the membemhip; an
unbiased, professional evalualion three times dur~g the flint rtve years; and a vote of the membemhip after r~e years to
'continue the program. Under the League's current bylaws, the board may also ~.~b to c~scontinue ~ Grassroc-~ Network at
any time.
Cities are now asked to vote to approve the adoltion of article XVI to the League's bylews reeling to the e~blishment of ~
Grassroots Network, along with a nmv increased dues schedule to pay for the prolFam. A ballot will be sent to each city. ..
Ballots retumed to the League must be po~arl~d no later than July 6, 2001.
Revised 135/07/01
Grassroots Network
'""~ -~', --!i -' I1~ .~-""
' -'' Frequently Asked Questions
What is the Gmssroots Coordinator Network?.
The Grassroots Coordinator Network would consist of 10 field offices stm'fed by 14 new and 3 existing staff who
· would serve as gmssro~L~ coordinatom. Their job would be to wok with city officials and the regional divisions of
the League to aggressively promote key League legislative priorities with legislators, district staff, local media and
other supporting community groups.
Why do we need a Grassroots Network?.
The Network proposal was developed by a task force (see page 4 for a list of task force members) authorized by the
League Board of Dimctom as part of its a[~al~egic planning process. It responds to the deep fruaha~ion of many
local officials about the cities' loss of political clout, compared with other, batter-positioned interest groups that
contribute millions of dollars to campaigns.
The concept of establishing local field off(es is used very successfully by political campaigns, as well es by teach-
ers, labor and other statewide membership organizations. These groups find that a network of field offices is a well-
tested means to communicate with a dispersed membership, and to mobilize local support for the organization's
causes. A recent survey by researchers at Wake Forest University found that key congressional staff, as well as
govemment and public affairs executives, ranked t~[assroots activities as more effective in influencing the outcome
of legislation than corporate or co~bact lobbying, campaign co.[fi;~tions or advocacy advertising. Califomia's
powerful education lobby must agree: they recently launched a new, high profile and well-funded 9~assroots
orgar~iTAtlon called EdVoice. These are tfm interests against which the League must compete in Sacramento.
How will cities benefit from this proposal?
The goal of the Gressroots Network is to focus on major issues of concem to all cities, such as fiscal reform,
increased funding for transportation and local co,hu;. Cities will benefit from the increased visibility of city issues in
local and statewide media, and by holding legislators accountable back home for the votes they cast in Samamento.
The potential payback for this investment is enormous. For example, on a statewide basis the proposed $1.6 million
dues increase needed to pay for the network is equivalent to only four one hundredths of one percent (0.04%) of
the annual $3.8 million cities receive in sales and use taxes.' It is one tmtth of one pament of the S'l.b-/billion
cities receive each year in VLF revenues. Portions of ~, VLF end sales and use tax revenues are at risk from
legislative raids if the state suffers another recession.
The costs am also relatively small when compared to the expendimrse made by organizations that compete wi~
cities and the League for the allocation of dollars in Sacramento. For example, the 1999-2000 legislative session
just two of the stat .ewide pubr,: empk3yas unions~ that sponsored or lobbied for SB 402 (the binding arb;ha*~on bill)
reported spending about $3.1 million in campaign ~,h;bufions to legislators, candidates for statewide office or
Page 2 of 4
current statewide office holders, in addition to their expenditures for in-house or contract lobbying. During the same
period, the California Teachers Association, which competes very effectively for funding in Sacramento, reported
spending approximately $2.7 million on lobbying expenses on education issues. In the same period, the CTA also
spent approximately $6.3 m~lion on campaign contributions to legislators, candidates for statewide office and
current statewide office holders, and $35.2 million on initiative campaigns to further advance their policy agenda.
What would the graasroots coordinators do?
The coordinator's mia is to increase the impact of the League's 16 regional divisions, by helping busy city officials
focus ~ategic attention on state legislators' and the govemo~s decisions affecting cities. The coordinators will work
to build relationships with local elected and appointed officials, local media, and other individuals and organizations
in the region who might be called upon to be part of a local coalition on a particular League initiative or pending
legislation.
The coordinators' would:
· Arrange meetings for city officials with legislators, plan news conferences, organize letter writing and media
campaigns, and coordinate gmssroots efforts with community groups with similar agendas.
, Support mayors, council members and city managers in drafting sample letters from cities; and train city staff on
undemtanding and accessing the legislative process.
· Provide regular presentations on legislative developments and insight into the political dynamics influencing
legislative developments.
· Meet regularly with legislative staff, media representatives and community groups about the League's legislative
priorities.
What kind of person will be hired to staff the Network?.
Everyone associated with this project has concluded that the best way to make this Network effective is to hire
seasoned, professional, political organizers, not policy anaiy~s or technical people right out of college. The budget
provides an attractive seiary and benefit package to do this. In addition to reassigning some League staff, we
expect to recruit savvy political people who have worked on legislative or local elections, staffed legislative offices,
or worked in public affairs or campaign consulting rims.
Where will the field offices be located?
The 10 field offices would be located around the state to ensure that coordinators are available to serve each of the
League's 16 geographic divisions, while still balancing the need to maintain close contact with legislative
and to be Acces;-'.')l; to ail cities. A map of the distribution by region is available in the information pack. et developed
by the League. The League will send out Requests for Proposals (RFPa) to solicit interest by cities in hosting a
coordinator. The goal will be to achieve the highest impact on League lobbying and greatest visibility among mem-
bers, while still keaping expenses as Iow as possible.
Page 3 of 4
How does the Network relate to the ABC effort?
· -'A~don for Better Cities was created to make expenditures and engage iq. "political' activities such as 8tatewide
initiative campaigns. Recently, through in-kind contributions of staff time and i~,-ategic counsel, ABC was able to
play a major role in helping to defeat Proposition 37, the initi~ive that would have severely limited cities' abilities to
impose fees to support local regulatory activities and provide services. While both the proposed Network and ABC
share a similar objective, namely to gain more political clout for cities, the Network coordinators will focus on
organizing local activities in support of League legislative positions. ABC will lead any initiative effort in support of
fiscal stability and similar objectives.
Our city already pays a lobbyist. Why do we need this network too?
The NetWOrk doesn't replace the ongoing need to have a ~irung lobbying presence in Sacramento. (In fact, part of
the task force mcommandatk)n which has been approved by the League Board of Directors is to sst aside at least
$50,000/year in the budget to hire contract lobbylats in Sacramento to assist League staff at s~,~egic times on
some key issues.) Cities that currently have their own contract or in-house lobbyist will probably continue to find
that having their own representation makes sense, for two reasons.
First, the League's lobbying program represents the interests of all 476 cities. It lobbies the legislature on matters of
statewide importance to cities, and cannot provide the representation needed to acldrees the individual needs of
cities or even a single region. Second, the gressroofs coordinators will be networking and organizing people, not
lobbyists. This work will support and enhance the efforts of all city lobbyists, regardless of whether they are con-
tractors or in-house staff. Several prominent contract lobbyists who represent individual cities have commented that
they see the network proposal as complementary to their ability to represent their clients.
What criteria will be used to measure the Networks effectiveness?
The League board specified that, if the Network wore approved by the membership, the board would set both long-
term goals and annualized objectives for the program and report them to the membership. The board also required
that the League engage the services of a consultant to conduct a professional membership survey that establishes
a base line of information about city ofticlais' perceptions of the'effectiveness of the League's legislative advocacy
efforts and the relative level of involvement of city officials in support of that advocacy work. The board's intention is
to repeat that survey at the end of year three and following year five, comparing changing attitudes and ievela of
efforts.
How will the League be held accountable for the Networks success or failure?
In addition to the survey to assess members' perceptions and actuai involvemant in gmesroots activities, the board
also directed the staff to (1) eymhlish a separate Gressroots Network account in the League budget, so that mem-
bers can track Network expenses; (2) publish an annuai legislative voting records report, including a ranking of
legislators and the Governor on key city issues; (3) report board goals and annual legislative and policy objectives
to the membership; (4) provide regular reports at the Executive Forum, Annual Conference and League deparb,,ent
and division meetings; and (5) provide periodic reports to the .membership.
Will this new program have a sunset date?
- On or before the end of the sixth year of the program (December 31, 2007), the board will ask the membership to
vote on the question of continuing the program. If the membership votes against the program continuation, the
Network would be shut down, and cease operations by no later than the end of the seventh year (December 31,
2008). :
Page 4 of 4
What will it coat?
The estimated annualized cost is $1.6 million, spread among all member cities. This est~ate is based upon the
following assumptions:
· Several current League s~a~f members will be reassigned. Approximately 14 new staff will be hired.
· Much of the cost for the individual off=es will be suhsidi-ed by the Cities where the office is located, for ex-
ample, by making office space and support staff available within a city facility.
How will costs be distributed?
Costs would be distributed among all cities based upon the League's dues structure, which is based on population.
Some small cities pay only a few hundred dollars, while the largest citlas pay tens of thousands of dollars. The
median dues statewide are currently about $4,930. The Network would increase median dues by approximately
$2,588.2
When would a dues increase start?
If the membership votes to approve the bylaw amendment the proposed dues increase would be effective on July 1,
2001.
Grassroots Lobbying Task Force
Harriet Miller, Mayor, Santa Barbara - Chair
John Thompson, City Manager, Vaceville, and President of the City Managers' Deparffnent- Vice Clmir
Eileen Ansari, Council Member, Diamond Bar
Ham/Armstrong, CounciI Member, Clot4s
Lee Ann Gamla, Council Member, Grand Terrace
Tom Haas. City Attorney, Walnut Creek
Jim Marshall, City Manager, Merced
Patsy Marshall. Council Member, Buena Park
Dave Mora, City Manager, Salinas
Kevin O'Rourke, City Manager, Fair, eld
Susan Peppier. Council Member, Redland~
Greg Peris. Council Member, Ca~bedral City
Mike Siminski, Council Member, Lompoc
Armour Smith, V/ce Ma~, Modesto
Anne Solam, Council Member, M///Va//ey
Richard Tofank, Former C,h/ef of Po//ce, Buena Park
Ruth Vreeland. Council Member, Monterey
Endnote
'- Grassroots Network
-'"Prop ed Distrib ti of Staff
Among League Divisions
~, [ I Legisla~ve Coordinator
~2 Legi. lative Coordinatom
3 Legislative Coordinators
~ ~ 2
Regional Divisions 4
1. Redwood Empire
2. Sacramento Yailey
3. Central Valley
4. South San Joaquin Valley
5. Desert-Mountain 12
6. Inland Empire
7. Riverside County ·
8. ImperialCounty _-. ~.'~-'~
9. San Diego County
10. Orange County
11. Los Angeles County
, 8
12. Channel Counlies 9 ·
13. Mo,-,ii, tey Bay
14. Peninsula -
15. Eastaay ,
16. North Bay
Grassroots Coordinator Network
Proposed Staff Assignments:
Cities and Legislative Districts
DIVISION # STAFF # cTr'[I~ #LEG. DIST.
North Bay & Redwood Empire 1 46 6
Saoamento Valley 1 58 8
Soufl'~ San .loaquin 1 37 7
Central Valley ! 26 4.
Riverside, Inland Empire, Desert Mtn. 2 54 13
O~ange County 1 34 10
Los Angeles County 3 86 33
Channel Counties 1 24 6
Peninsula, East Bay, Monterey Bay 3 86 23
San Diego, Imperial County 1 25 10
League of California Cities
'- Ballot on Grassroots Network
City of
Does your city vote to approve the addition of article XVI to the
League's bylaws relating to the establishment of a League
Gmssmots Network (attached as Attachment A and
incorporated by reference in this ballot), along with the dues
schedule (attached as Attachment B and also incorporated by
reference in this ballot)?
[ ] Yes
[]No
Ballot returned by:
City Official Name
City Official Title
Ballots must be retumed by First Class Mail and postmarked no
later than July 6, 2001.
Return ballots to:
League of Califomia Cities
1400 K Street, 4th Floor
Sacramento, CA 95814
_ Attention: Counting Committee
Attachment A:
Proposed Addition to League Bylaws
Article XVI: Establishment and Financing of
Grassroots Network
Section 1: Enhancement of Advocacy Efforts.
To enhance the League's advocacy efforts on behalf of cities, the League hereby
establishes a GrassmoL~ Network. The Grassmots Network consists of a sedes of field
offices throughout California, responsible for coordinating city advocacy efforts and
promoting statewide League policy priorities.
Section 2: Duee Increase
(a) Initial Financing. The dues increase approved concurrently with the addition
of Article XVl shall finance the League's Gmssmots Network for the second half
of 2001 and for 2002. The increase shall be used exclusively to finance the
Gmssroots Network.
(b) Continued Financing. Any subsequent dues increases shall occur in
accordance with Article IV.~
Section 3: Accountability
(a) Annual Goal-Setting and Performance Assessment. The League Board.
shall set long-term goals and annual objectives for the League's Grassroots
Network. The League Board shall periodically report to the League's Member
Cities on the Grassroots Network's performance in meeting those goals and
objectives.
(b) Board Discontinuance. If at any time the League Board finds the
Grassmots Network is not meeting its objectives on behalf of cities, the League
Board may discontinue the Grassmots Network.
(c) Membership Vote on Program Continuation. On or before December 31,
2007, the Board shall ask Member Cities to vote on whether to continue the
Grassmots Network beyond December 31, 2008.2
~ Explanatory Note: 'Ardcle IV' is the exi~ng section ofthe League's bylaws, which provide for 1) a
two-thirds vote of approval by the League board for all dues Increases as v/ell as 2) division ratification of dues
increases In excess of the Consumer Price Index. Article IV also cape individual city dues increases at $5,000
per year.
2 The League's bylaws provide that a majority of votes cast is necessary for decision on League votes.
See Article Xll, § 4.
Attachment B:
PmpomM Dues to Establish the Grassroots Network
D~ ~'" ~ ~2 .... ': ~':'~ N~
1 ,~1 ~ 1,2~ .. 4~ 514 7~ ' '
1,~1 ~ 1,7~ .. ~7 7~ 1,1~
2,001 ~ 2,2~ . · ~ ~ 1,~1
2,~1 ~ 2,5~ .. 1,020 1,~1 ~ 1,618
7,501 m 10,~ .. Z359 2,~ 3,741
10,~1 ~ 15,~ .. 2,~ 2,~1 4,516
15,~1 ~ 20,~0 .. 3,279 3,411 5,~1
25,~1 ~ 30,~ .. 4,~ 5,127 7,818
30,001 ~ 40,~ .. 6,~ 6,311 9,~4
~,001 ~ ~,~ .. 7,~ 7,~ ~ ;.~:~'~.~ 11,7~
50,~1 ~ ~,~ .. 8,~ 8,~ 13,~7
60,~1 ~ 70,~ .. 9,~ 9,~0 14,~
70,001 m 80,~ ... 9,817 10,210 15,~0
~ ~ ~ ~ O,~ ~ ~u~ o~ ~ ~1
City Hall
10300 Torte Avenue
~ Cupertino, CA 95014-3255
(408) 777-3262
· CITY OF FAX: (408) 777-3366
CUPE INO
SUMMARY
Agenda Item "] Date: June 18, 2001
Subject: Recommendation for endorsement of the Draft Compact for a Sustainable Bay Area.
Background: The Bay Area Alliance for Sustainable Development (Bay Area Alliance) is a
coalition established in 1997 to develop and implement a sustainability action plan for the Bay
Area. Member organizations include thc Bank of America, Greenbelt Alliance, Metropolitan
Transportation Commission, Sierra Club, the U.S. Depa~huent of Commerce, and many others.
The Bay Area Alliance initially presented the Draft Compact for a Sustainable Bay Area (Draft
Compact) to the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) General Assembly in April
1999.
The Draft Compact identifies key regional challenges and recommends a package often strategic
commitments to meet those challenges. Intended as a commitment by member organizations to
take specific steps over the next twenty-five years, the Draft Compact may also serve as au action
plan to guide regional cooperative efforts. The Draft Compact identifies three elements necessary
for sustainable development, a pwsperous economy, quality environment, and social equity.
To address these three key issues, members of the Bay Area Alliance propose thc following ten
strategic conunitments:
1. Enable a diversified, sustainable and competitive economy to continue to prosper and
provide jobs in order to achieve a high quality of life for all Bay Area residents.
2. Accommodate sufficient housing affordable to all income levels within the Bay Area to
match population increases and job generation.
3. Target transportation investment to achieve a world-class comprehensive, integrated and
balanced multi-modal system that supports efficient land use and decreases dependency
on single-occupancy vehicle lrips.
4. Preserve and restore the region's natural assets, including San Francisco Bay, farmland,
open space, other habitats, and air and water quality.
5. Use resources efficiently, eliminate pollution and si~ificantly reduce waste.
6. Focus investment to preserve and revitalize neighborhoods.
7. Provide all residents with the opportunity for quality education and lifelong learning to
help them meet their highest aspirations.
8. Promote healthy and safe communities.
_ 9. Implement local government fiscal reforms and revenue sharing.
· 10. Stimulate civic engagement.
These ten commitments fom~ the centerpiece of thc Draft Compact. The Draft Compact provides
an overview statement and specific actions associated with each of the commih~ents.
Recommendation: Endorse the Draft Compact for a Sustainable Bay Area and to support and
participate in the coopcrative regional dialogue that it rcpresents.
Submitted by: Approved for submission:
Rick Kitson David Knapp
Public Info~alion Officer City Manager
e-vision
_ the future
Iia¥ Are~. Alliance for
Sust,,inable Development
DRAFT COBPACT FOR A SUSTAINABLE BAY AREA
e-v/sion: A vision of the future that integrates sustainable development es the ability "...to meet
the three Es of Sustainable Development: pros- the needs of the present without compromising
perous economy, quality environment, social the ability of future generations to meet their own
equity, e.v/sion is inclusive of ail stakeholders needs.'
and celebrates the region's diverse social, envi-
ronmental, and economic strengths. The Bay Ama Alliance is committed to fanilitat-
ing a region-wide dialogue on how the region can
Introduction grow in a more sustainable manner, and to taking
actions commensurate with achieving that goal.
The Bay Area's vibrant economy, spectacular In ail its activities and deliberations the Bay Area
environmental resources, cultural amenities, Alliance is employing e-vision, integrating the
educational institutions, and the rich diver~ty of essential three Es of SUStalrklbJlity in order to
the population make this a uniquely attractive achieve and maintain a prosperous economy,
place. Uke many growing regions, however, the quaiity environment, and sodal equity.
Bay Area is undergoing rapid changes and faring
serious chailenges. Traffic congestion, long For the past three years, Bay Area Nliance
commutes and overburdened transit systems, members-public and private sector leaders who
loss of open space, skyrocketing housing costs, represent the eovimnment, equity, the economy,
declining ne';hberheods, air and water pollution, govemment, and other interests-and many other
and the increasingly inequitable distribution of the partidpants have worked collaboratively to cralt a
benefits of our thriving economy are inter-related Draft Compac~ for a Sustainable Bay Area (Draft
problems that require integrated solutions. Sus- Compact). The Draft Compact identifies key re-
taining the region's environment and economy in glonal challenges and recommends a package of
a way that ensures equity for all residents re- 10 strategic commitments to meet those chai-
quires innovative thinking and e.v/sion: a hal- lenges and put the Bay Area on a more sustain-
anced, inclusive, collaborative approach, able path.
Bay Area Nliance for Draft Compact for e
Susl~inabia Development Sustainable Bay Area
The Bay 'Aree Alliance for Sustain~ble Devei- The Draft Compact for a Sustainable Bay Area is
opment (B;~/ Area Nliance) is a multi- a commitment by participating organizations to
stakeholder coalition established in 1997 to de- take specific steps extending over the next quar-
velop and implement a sustainabitity action plan ter centu~/. It is also an ac'don p/an to guide
for the Bay Area. The Bay Ama Alliance has govemment, businesses, civic organizations, and
embraced the United Nations World CommLssion individuals in cooperatbe etfo~ that will load to
on Environment and Development detin'~ion of a mere sustainable region.
The Ten Commitments to Action, which forms Next Steps
the centerpiece of the Draft Compact for a Sus-
tainable Bay Area, contains the following 10 stre-The Bay Area Alfiance will seek input from Bay
tegic commitments: Area leaders and the public on ideas to refine the
Draft Compact and generate support for its rec-
1. Enable a diversified, sustainable, and corn- ommendations. To ensure that it is widely avail-
petitive economy to continue to prosper and able for review, the Draft Compact has been
provide jobs in order to achieve a high qual- posted on the Bey Area Alliance Web site at
ity of life for all Bay Area residents, www. BavAreaAIlianco.ora, and will be distributed
2. Accommodate sufficient housing affordable at stakeholder meetings and by mail. Comments
to all income levels within the Bay Area to on the Draft Compact can be submitted using the
match population increases and job genera- companion feedback form, which can be ob-
tion. tained from the Bay Area Alliance and returned
by mail, fax, or completed on the Web site. The
3. Target transportation investment to achieve input received will be used to enhance the Draft
a world-class comprehensive, integrated, Compact before submitting it to the Bay Arek
and balanced multi.medal system that sup- Alliance member organizations for approval and
ports efficient land use and decreases de- implementation. You are encouraged to share
pendency on single-occupancy vehicle your comments and participate. Once there is
trips, regional consensus on a final Compact for a Sus-
4. Preserve and restore the region's natural tainable Bay Area, the focus will be on implemen-
assets, including San Francisco Bay, farm- tation.
land, open space, other habitats, and air
and water quality. Related Activities
5. Use resources efficiently, eliminate pollu-
tion, and significantly reduce waste. The Bay Area Alliance and the five Regional
Agencies-Association of Bay Area Governments,
6. Focus investment to preserve and revitalize Metropolitan Transportation Commission, Bay
neighborhoods. Area Nr Quality Management District, Regional
7. Provide all res'~dents with the opportunity forWater Quality Control Board, and Bay Conserva-
quality education and lifelong learning to tion and Development Commission-have joined
help them meet their highest aspirations, together to promote smart growth and sustain-
8. Promote healthy and safe communities, able development for the Bay Area through the
9. Implement local govemment fiscal reforms development of the Smart Growth Strategy and
Regional Livability Footprint. Working under a
and revenue sharing, combined work plan, beginning in Spring 2001
10. Stimulate civic engagement, the partnership will pursue an extensive public
participation process with two rounds of work-
The Bay Area Alliance initially presented the shops in each of the nine Bay Area counties.
Draft Compact to the Association of Bay Area
Govemments General Assembly (ABAG) in April Get Involved
1999. Since then, it has been revised to reflect
input received from ABAG, other member organi- Visit the Web site at www. BavAreaAIliance.ora to
· zations and stakeholders, and others. The Draft read the Draft Compact, complete the feedback
Compact is now ready for broader review, form online, and learn more about related antivi-
ties and implementation projects.
You can also contact the Bay Area Alliance for
Sustainable Development at 510/464-7978.
Bay Area Alliance for Sustainable Development
Post Office Box 2050 Voice: (510) 464-7978
oakland California 94604-2050 Fax: (510) 464-7970
July 2oo0
Dear Bay Area Friends:
We are pleased to present the Draft Compact for A Sustainable Bay Area (Draft Compact) and to invite
your active engagement in shaping the final version of this document. The purpose of the Draft
Compact is to encourage and facilitate a regional conversation about a sustainable future for the Bay
Area. It is important to underscore the fact that this is a DRAFT.
In order to facilitate a more productive cliscmsion and a greater likelihood of regional consensus, the
member organizations of the Bay Area Alliance for Sustainable Development along with many other
participants have worked diligently to reach "agreement in principle' on the Draft Compact. We are
particularly grateful to the county and city offici~l~ participating in the 199~ and 2000 General
Assemblies of the Association of Bay Area Governments for comidering and voting upon the initial
draft and deliberating strategies for implementation. Our efforts are intended to be a helpful starting
point to engage in a meaningful discussion that will lead to conclusions and actions. There will be a
series of public workshops and meetings to review and refine this Draft Compact before it is finalized.
We welcome your feedback and input through the workshops and the respome survey, which is
available on paper or on-line.
The Draft Compact identifies key regional challenges and recommends a package of strategic
commitments to meet those challenges to put the Bay Area on a more suminable path. The Draft
Compact embraces and employs e-vision--integrating the essential Three Es of Sustainable
Development in order to achieve and maintain a prosperous economy, quality environment, and
social equity. Hence the design of the cover, with the word "linking" connecting the Three ~s to con-
vey the concept of integration.
This Draft Compact also is a commitment by member organizations of the Bay Area Alliance to take
specific steps extending over the next quarter century. It is envisioned that the final Compact will be
an action plan to guide government, employers, civic organizations and individuals in cooperative
efforts that will lead to a more sustainable region.
We recognize that full implementation of the strategies and actiom in this document will not ensure
that the Bay Area will be sustainable. However, such action would be a large step in the tight direc-
tion. By working togathet and simultaneously considering social equity, environmental quality, and
economic prosperity, we will leave a more sustainable future for generations to come in the Bay Area.
Sincerely,
Carl Anthony William I. Carroll Robert L. Harris
Executive Director President Vice President Environmental Affairs.
Urban Habitat Program Association of Bay Area Governments Pacific Gas and Electric Gompany
Sunne Wright McPe~k Michele Panault
President and CEO International Vice Presidem
Bay Area Council Sierra Club
Introduction
l ~he Bay Area's vibrant economy, spectacular environmental resources, cultur-
al amenities, educational institutions, and the rich diversity of the population
make this region a unique and special place. As many growing regions, however,
the Bay Area is undergoing rapid changes and facing serious challenges. Traffic
congestion, long commutes and overburdened transit systems, the lack of suffi-
cient housing and skyrocketing housing costs, loss of open space, declining
neighborhoods, air and water pollution and the increasingly inequitable distri- 'We hm, e to be successful if we want
bution of the benefits of our thriving economy are interrelated problems that
to achieve our own dreams and to
require integrated solutions. Sustaining the region's environment and economy
in a way that ensures equity for all residents requires innovative thinking and provide even greater opportunities
"e-vision"--a balanced, integrated, inclusive, collaborative approach, for our children. ~
S~JpeMsor 3irn Beau
Santa CLara County
Chair, Metropolitan
e - v i $ i o ri Transpo~t~on Commission
e-vision is a vision of the future that integrares the Three Es of Sustainable
Development (Three Es): prosperous economy, quality environm~.,~t, sad
sodal equity, e-vision is inclusive of all stakeholders; and celebrates the re~ion's
diverse social, environmental, and economic strengths.
Bay Area AI, Liance for
Sustainable Devetopment
The Bay Area Allhnce for Sustainable Development (Bay Area Alliance) is a ~Sustainable d~elopment has to be a
multi-stakeholder coalition established in 1997 to develop and implement a sus-
tainability action plan for the Bay Area. The Bay Area Alliance has embraced the ~ta~hotder-driven process."
United Nations World Commission on Environment and Development defini- ~ ~o~b
tion of sustainable development as the ability :..to meet the needs of the present A~n; ~cutive 0~cer.
San Frandsco Bay Regional
without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own water QuaLity Control Board
needs;'
The overall goal of the Bay Area Alliance is to reach consensus regionwide among
a critical mass of stakeholder organizations and civic leaders regarding a new
shared vision rooted in common values about how the region can grow in a
more sustainable manner. The overarching strategy is to achieve the regionwide
consensus on a new ~hared vision through the development and adoption of a
"compact" that can become the foundation for implementation actions by both
the public and private sectors at the local, regional, state and national levels.
DRAFT CO#PACT FOR A SUSTATNABLE BAY AREA
The Bay Area Alliance is connnltte~ to f~cilit~tlng a reg~onwkle (~logue on how
the re$ion can grow in a more sustainable manner, and to taking actions com-
rr~nsurate with achieving tl~t goal. In ell activities end deliberations thc Bay
Ar~ Alliance is ~rnploying c-vision, integrating thc essential Three ES of sus-
tainabillty in order to aoNleve and maintain a prosperous ~conomy, quality
environment, and social equity.
Draft Compact for a
SustainabLe Bay Area
'The Vision is right on... the The purpose of the Draft Compact for A Sustainable Bay Area (Draft Compact) is
Commitments are great. We need to invite and encourage a regional conversation about how the Bay Area can grow
in a more sustainable manner. It is important to underscore the fact that it is a
o vehicle to achieve good, strong, DRAFT.
sustainable land use practices."
The Draft Comp,ct identifies key regional challenges and recommends a package
Supe~sor Mik~ ~n of ten strategic commitments to meet those challenges m put the Bay Area on
san mteo County a more sustainable path. This Draft Compact is a commitment by member or,an-
Chair, 8a¥ Ama Air Ouatity
Mana~emnt 0ismct 1To,ions m take specific steps over the nex~ quart, er century. It is also a proposed
action plan to guide cooperative efforts that will lead m a more sustainable
region.
This Draft Compact recommends strategies and actions that move toward the
- essential Three ES of sustainability: prosperous economy, quality environment,
and social equity. AH are equally important and interdependent. The Three ES
also represent different constituencies in the Bay Area that, along with local and
regional governments, have the ability to accomplish the recommended actions.
Each constituency views every strategy and action through its particular lens or
point of view. The recommendations in the Draft Compact ~ have a positive
effect on all Three Es.
This Draft Compact rall~ for actions by business, community and civic organiza-
tious, individuals, and government to bring about the vision. It dill be especially
'We ore one r~j~on. The problems important for everyone to consider decisions from the perspectives of all Three
we share don't stop at county Es--r..onomy, environment, equity.
boundarfe~ or city limit line~.
Oirty air do~n't s~op at the~e
ju.sdic ons. Weneedmpor cip t Initial Input from Local 0fficiats
in reffional solutions.'
The Bay Area Alliance for Sustainable Development initially prc '.nted this Draft
sure,sot wlUum Ca~oU Compna to the Association of BayArea Governments (ABAG) General Assembly
Solano County
President, ~ssociation of byin April 1999. Since then, it has been revised to reflect input received from ABAG,
Area Governments Other member orsanizations and stakeholders, and other participants. The Draft
-- Compact and the work of the Bay Area AHhnce helped shape the discussion at
ABAG's General Assembly in April 2000, which was co-sponsored by the Urban
Land Institute, and for which the theme was Smart Growth: Rhetoric to Reality.
The Draft Compact is now ready for broader review.
ZNTRODU£TZON S
Pubtic Review to Shape Final Compact
The Bay Area Alliance for Sustainable Development will seek input from Bay
Area leaders and the public to refine the Dm~ Compact and develop consensus
on the recommended actions. Through workshops in each Bay Area county, a
website, and other means, the Bay Area Alliance will m_nke the Draft Compact
widely available for review. The input received will be used to finalize the
Compact before submitting it to the member organizations for approval and
implementation. Your involvement and participation will make a difference in
the future of the region.
Srhe Bay Area Alliance for Sustainable Development adopted in June 1997 the
following Vision:
The members of the Bay Area Alliance for Sustainable Development agree that a
sustainable Bay Area must have the following attributes:
Envlronmmtmi qmdlty is
· The Bay Area ecos~em--includin$ the Bay-Delta £stua~, air quality, wet-
la~cls ~d watersheds, and biodive~i"/--Ls healthy, vibra~, and productive.
· Open space and agriculture are preserved as a result of efficient, compact land
· Resources are conserved and waste is eliminated.
The economy is prosperous.
· The regional economy is robust, and productivity is high.
· Unemployment rates are low, and poverty levels are decreased.
· Sufficient housing affordable to the workforce is available close to job centers.
· Economic well being and quality of life are high in all neighborhoods.
· Traffic congestion is greatly reduced. There is a first-rate public transportation
'The Vision of the Bay Ama Alliance system including water transit and the percentage of single occupant vehicle
des~bes a place wheF~ most people trips si~ificandy declines.
would want to live. fie ne~d to actThe diwr~Mym~ mrs ofthepopulation Ihlre/here~ion's economlc p~ty
now to pmt~t the quai~ of the and .~d. ro.mmt~l quality.
· Education performanc~ is greatly improved, especblly among the dbadvan-
environment, continue the robust ~ population.
economy and ensure equitable · Sln'atesic capitol i~vestmenu i~ priori./neishborhoocls, in pa~Luership with
opportunities for o/L' local neishborhood leaders, improve the physical and social environment,
provide living-wase jobs, and enhance housin8 oppormnifi, for neishbor-
wi, Tray,s hood residents.
~y c. mn~.. and · The workforc~ in ali sectors and civic leade.hip throu~out the r~ion reflect
.-- DM~pmnt Com.~i.. the diversi~ of the population.
· Land-me phnnins, economic development and the transportation network
mi~imiz~ clispariti~s among nei~hborhoocb ~nd municipalities.
The sustainable vision is lx)ssible, starting now a~d continuin$ over ~.e next
quarter cenm~/.
Cha[I. enges
The Bay Area is one of the world's most desirable places to live and work. It has
a robust and expanding economy. It is a gateway to the Pacific Rim. It has
internationally-known institutions of higher learning. It has a richly-diverse
population. It has a climate that is among the best in the nation. And it has nat-
urai resources whose beauty is unmatched anywhere in the world.
But the Bay Area also faces major challenges to a prosperous economy, quality
environment, and social equity. These challenges are interconnected and must be
addressed comprehensively.
1. Sr~a~mable economy. The Bay Area economy has not been immune to
recession. In the 1990s, the region experienced the most significant recession
since the Great Depression. In aggregate, the recovery from this t~_e_*_~ion has
gone very well. But many people have been left out of the recovery. The gap
between the "haves~ and 'have-nots' has grown in the region. Many workers "/he §mwfn9 economic 9aO between
earn less tha~ a living wage., the rich and the poor is leading to
2. Housing supply. People travel increasing distances between home and
concentrated poverty in inner c~ties
work, leading to tra~c consesdon, persona] stress and excessive time away
from families. Housing prices are among the highest in the tmtion, adding and older suburbs. AU neighborhoods
to the problem of homelessness and causing Bay .~ea workers to live out- and communftias should have a.fair
side the region. Decent, afl'ordabla, safe and acc;;;ib]e housing should be
avauabla to aU Bay ,Men residents, share ~ the benefits as well as the
3. Trampot*mtJon system. HistoricaJ expansion of the freeway system in the rasponsibili~ias of growth.
Bay Area has reinforced low-demity vehicle-dependent suburban develop- cart Anthony
merit and more congestion. While ftmdi~g priorities have shifted in recent E~ecu~ive Director,
y~ars, public transit systems throughout the Bay Area are not suEiciendy Urban Habitat Program
coordinated and do not provide adequate service, which is especiauy a hard-
ship in low-income areas.
4. Sm 1:francisco Bay, habitats, ~L-mlm~d, opm R~ce md othe~ m~tural
assets. Prevauing low-dmsity Patterns of development separate homes from
job centers, so,ices and other destinations. These pattez~.s are wastin$
resources, eatin$ up open space, wildlife habitat and latin]and, and threat-
ening San Francisco Bay, the region's biodiversity and human health
through the degradation of air and water qmdity.
5. Reeoutce ~ Ine~ciant practices of production and cousumpdon cause "Without a qunIRy environment and
pollution and th~aten the ~utuz~ prosperity of the economy, social equity, a prosp~ous economy
6. NeiBhl~orhood J~teBrJty. The movement of job centers away from in,er
is a short t~rm phenomenon.
city neighborhoods and older suburbs is resultin$ in concent~atious of
poverty, deteriorated housing, a lack of adequate job training, public t~-
sit and other services, and a growi~ disparity of incomes between the z~ch vice President Environmental
Affair~, Pacific Gas and
and poor. £1ect~c Company ,.
7. F. dac~tio~ml syst~,m. The qtm]ity of the K-12 education system has deterio-
rated to the point where the region is no longer among tmtiomd educatioml
8 DRAFT CO#PACT FOR A SUSTAZNABLE BAY AREA
leaders. The current educational system no longer provides an adequately-
_ prepared workforce, and the future of the region's children is at risk.
· /r Boy Recjion eneironment is 8. Community health and s~ety. Declining inner city neighborhoods and
older suburbs.have r. xperienced increasing crime and safety concerns. These
Jn jeopanly and fn some ways issues are often exacerbated by environmental degradation in the same areas
destining. The Bay Area Alliance leading to increasinl~ levels of health-related problems. People move away
from unsafe and unhealthy communities, thereby increasing the rate of
clm~ Compac~ mai~s a promising
de,-iine o~ the coznmunity.
sta~ on a#clmssing t~ese c~a~ng~s
9. Local governmmt finance. Because of unreliable sources of funds, local
i. m~ys t~ot are consistent ~th governments often plan land uses that compete with other iurisdictions in
economic prospe#ty and order to increase revenues to meet growing demands for social and other
municipal services. The result is a growing financial challenge, particularly
social ~qui~.' for inner cities and older suburbs.
s~erman cmos 10. Civic enpfement. Increasing geographic and cultural separation among
Siena Club
people of different races, oboes, and cultures and a lack of understanding
of the dynamics of growth have resulted in a decline of a common civic con-
science. People who are stressed by poverty, long commutes, and lack of
support networks have little time for involvement in their neighborhoods
and cozrirzlunit, ies. t/V'ithout established mechanisms for ongoing dialogue
and poli~ development, we cannot address emerging regional challenges
effectively and equitably.
if present trends continue, the Bay Area quality of life will deteriorate. But trends
.- are not destiny. A more sustainable future is possible through the cooperation of
f not well plarmecl, growt~ can the conssimencies of the Three ILs-economy, environment, equity--working in
degrade our c~t~es and the partnership with government at all levels.
enviro,ment, which threatens This Dm~ Compatriot a Sustainable Bay Area contains specific Commitments to
economic co,ditions. We stand Action to address the major challenges to achieving a more sustainable region.
.firmly o, ~e side of planning ~or
growth that.~els economic
prasper~ty, environmental protec~on
a,O equitable opportunities and
be,e~ts--in short, planning that
prote~ cl~allty of iifz '
Candace Skadatos
Senior Vice I~sidmnt,
Director Environmental
Initiatives, Bank of America
_Imp[ementation
'he overall goal of the Bay Area ARiance for Smtainable Development i~ to
achieve more sustainable growth and a smarter land ute pattern in the region.
Thus, although reaching regional con,usus on a final Compact for a 5ustainabl~
Bay Ar~a will be an important milestone, there must be an ultbnate focus on
implementation.
The impact of implementation will be measured ragularly using the indicator~
induded in Appendix A of this Draft Compact document. The Bay A~a Alliance is
~ developing a compilation of"best pract/ces' for communities, busines~s, and
individual households to promote sustainable development and smart growth.
In addition, the Bay Area Alliance has hunched a R~ioasl Livabffity F. ootlaint
lh. oj~ct to fadlitate regional consensus on how the Commitments in the Draf~
Compact for a Sustainable Bay Am: relate to land use. The Regional Livability
Footprint Project is being coordinated with the work of the regional agencies on
smart growth to develop an =alternative growth scenario' for the Rel~ional Trans- '~tbo~t o r~io.d visio, n,d
portation Impwvement Plan. There will be an extensive public participation
process to reach regional consensus on a preferred Regional IJvab~ty Footprint strot~. Io~i, co~r~ commu,ities
for the future. For more information on how you can get involved, please contact bm~ the most to/me Ira'olvi.§
the Bay Area Alliance at (510) 464-7978 or www. BayAreaAlliance.o~. these communities in re~ionnl
A high-prioriv/ implementation stmtagy for the Bay Area Al]hnce is the plnnnin§ processes v,,fU improve
Community' C~pit~l ]nve~ment ]~ithfl~e to attract private investment into the the qudfty o.f Iffe fvr nil."
poorest neighborhoods in partnership with the community. The CommuniV/
Capital Investment Initiative is intended to simultaneously tackle poverty with uds irt~ga
market-based solutions and promote smart growth. Work on this Inithtive will tauno Issu~ ~omm
provide valuable real-time information and practical lessons on the potent/al for
inffll, land rec~/cling, and neighborhood revitalization as strategies for sustain-
able development.
11
Commitments to Action
Thtois Drdft C~m~ac~or ~ $~s~n~bb ~y Ar~ contains specific Commitments
Action to address the major challenses to achieving a sust-;,,-ble region.
The members of the Bay Area Alliance for Sustainable Development propose the
following framework for bold action. The ten strategic commitments are inex-~i-
cably interconnected, and they are directly linked to the previous ten challenges.
The order of listing is not intended to imply a priority.
1. Emble · diversified, sustainable tnd competitive economy to
continue to prosper and provide jobs in order to ..hleve · high
quality of llfe for aH Bay Area ruidents.
2..~,-,-~,~odate su~cimt ho-~i-g nffordabk to all income levels
within the Bay Area to match population increases and job
seneration.
3. Target transportation invest,~ent to achieve a world-class com-
prehensive, intesrated and bsts-.-n multi-modal system that
supports ~4~iant land use and decreases dependency on single-
occupancy vehicle trips.
4. Presto-ye and restore the re~ion'a natural assets, including'San
Francisco Bay, farmland, open space, other habitats, and air and
5. Use resource___ ~4~cimtly. ~te pollution and sJ.~i~cantly
reduce waste.
6. Focus investment to preserve and t~-vitalize neighborhoods.
and lifelong iear, lnS to help them meet their highest a~pirntions.
8.
Promote healthy and safe communities.
9. Implement local governmmt fiscal reforms and revenue sharin&
10.
Stimulate civic ~gsge~,nt.
hese Ten Commitments to Action form the centerpiece of the Draft Corn/Mcr for
a 5usMinable Bay Are~. ~h~ Draft Compact sets forth an overview statement and
specific actions associated with each of the ten commitments.
EXHIBIT eAW
ANNEXATION TO TK; CITY OF CUPERTINO, CA
ENTITLED: N. ST~LL~NG RD. 00-12
All that certain real property situated in the County of Santa
Clara, State of California, being all of Lot 9 of Tract No. 631,
GARDEN GATE VILLAGE, and a portion of Stelling Road as shown upon
that certainMap filed for record in the Office of the Recorder
of said County and State on May 23, 1949,-in Book 22 of Maps at
Page 56, more particularly described as follows:
Beginning at the point of intersection of the Easterly
prolongation of the Northerly line of said Lot 9, 10 feet
Easterly from the Westerly l~ne of Stelling Road with the
Westerly boundary line of that certain annexation to the City of
Cupertino entitled 'Stelling 2, Ordinance 57;
Thence running along the Westerly boundary l'i~e of said
annexation 80°10'20"W 77.45 feet~
Thence leaving said Westerly line and along the Southerly line of
said Lot and the Easterly prolongation thereof, N89°54'W 135.00
feet to the Southwesterly corner thereofI
Thence along the Westerly line thereof, N0°10'20'E 77.45 feet to
the Northwesterly corner there6f~ ~
Thence. along the Northerly line thereof, S89'54'E 135.00 feet to
the Point of Beginning.
Containing 10,456 square feet or 0.240 of an acre, more or less.
Date: Jan 8, 2001
APN: 326-08-053
Address: 10599 N. Stelling Rd.
CuPertino, CA
· -- R~$OLUTION NO. 01-129
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF TH~ CITY OF CUPERTINO
MAKING DETERMINATIONS AND APPROVING THE RF_~RGANIZATION OF
AREA DESIGNATED '~N. STELLING ROAD 00-12", APPROXIMATELY 0.24 ACRE
LOCATED AT 10599 N. STELLING ROAD, ON TI~ WEST SIDE OF ST£LLING
ROAD BETWELrN GARDENA DRIVE AND GREENLEAF DRIVE; LIN-HAI NAN
(APN 326-08-053)
WHEREAS, a petition for the annexation of certain territory to the City of
Cupertino in the County of Santa Clara consisting of 0.24+_ acre on the west side of
N. Stelling Road (APN 326-08-053) has been filed by property owner Lin-I-Iia Nan; and
WHEREAS, on May 7, 2001, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 01-100
initiating proceedings for annexation of the area designated "lq. Stelling Road 00-12";
and
WHEREAS, said territory is uninhabited and all owners of land included in the
proposal consent to this annexation; and
WHERF, AS, Section 35150.5 of the California Government Code states that the
Local Agency Formation Coxnmission shall not have any authority to review an
annexation to any City in Santa Clara County of unincorporated territory which is within
the urban service area of the city of the annexation if initiated by resolution of the
lcgislat/ve body and therefore the City Council of the City of Cupertino is now the
conducting authority for said annexation; and
V~-IEREAS, Government Code Section 56837 provides that if a petition for
annexation is signed by all owners of land withi~ the affected t~/iltory the City Council
may approve or disapprove the annexation without public hearing; and
WHEREAS, evidence was presented to thc City Council;
NOW, THHREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Cupertino as follows:
1. That it is thc conducting authority pursuant to Section 35150.5 of the Government
Code for the ennsxafion of property designated ~l. Stelllng Road 00-12", more
particularly described in Exhibit "A";
2. That the following finainss are made by the City Council of the City of
Cupertino:
Resolution No. 01-129 Page 2
a. That said territory is uninhabited and comprises approximately 0.24
b. That the annexation is oonsistent with the orderly snr~exation of territory
with the City's urban service area and is consistent with the City policy
of annexing when providing City services.
c. The City Council has completed an initial study and has found that the
annexation of said territory has no si~anificant impact on the environment,
and previously approved the granting of a Negative Declaration.
d. The City Council on May 7, 2001, enacted an ordinance prezonlng the
subject territory to City of Cupertino Pre RI-10 zone.
e. Annexation to the City of Cupertino will affect no changes in special
di,t icts.
f. That the territory is within the city urban service area as adopted by the
Local Agency Formation Commission.
g. That the annexation is made subject to no terms and conditions.
h. That the Colmty Surveyor has deto-,,,ined the boundaries of the proposed
annexation to be definite and certain, and in compliance with the
Commission's road annexation policies. The City shall reimburse the
County for actual costs incurred by the County Surveyor in making this
determination.
i. That the proposed annexation does not create islands or areas in which it
would be difficult to provide municipal services.
j. That the proposed annexation does not split line of assese~,,ent of
ownership.
k. That the proposed annexation is consistent with the City's General Plan.
1. That thc City has complied with all conditions imposed by the
commission for inclusion of the territory in the City's urban service area.
m. That the ten/tory to be annexed is contiguous to existing City limits under
provisions of the Government Code.
3. That said annexation is hereby ordered without election pursuant to Seotion 35151
et seq. of the Government Code.
Resolution No. 01-129 Page
-. 4. That the Clerk of the City Council of the City of Cupertino is directed to Slve
notice of said annexation as prescribed by law.
BE IT FURTI-~R RESOLVED that upon completion of these reorganization
proceedings the territory annexed will be detached from thc Santa Clara County Lighting
Service Di~uict.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City
of Cupertino this day of Sune, 2001, by the following vote:
Vote M~mbers of the City Council
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST: APPROVED:
City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupe,~t~o
...... EXIHBIT
ORANGE AVENUE 01-03
All of that certain real property situated in the Santa Clara County, state of California,
being the southerly 50 feet front and rear measurements, of lot 95 as shown upon that
certain map entitled "Map of Subdivision "A" Monte Vista", filed in the office of
Recorder of Santa Clara County, in Book P oflVlaps, at page 20, described as follows:
Beginning at the Southeasterly corner of Lot 95, said point being the Northeasterly comer
of the Annexation to the City of Cupertino, as defined by the Annexation titled "Orange
87-02", also lying on the Westerly line of Orange Avenue, 30 feet in width as shown on
above referred to Map;
Thence Nox~h 50 feet along the Easterly line of said Lot 95 and the Annexation line of
City of Cupertino, as defined by the Annexation tiffed "Orange Ave. 90-02";
Thence West 105.15 f~et along said "Ornn_oe Ave. 90-02" Annexation to a point on the
Westerly line of ~id Lot 95, said point also lying on the Easterly line of the Annexation
to the City of Cupertino, as defined by the Annexation titled "Almaden 80-13";
Thence South 50 feet along the Easterly line of said "Almaden 80-13" Annexation to the
Southwesterly comer of Lot 95, said point Aim being the Northwesterly comer of the
Annexation to the City of Cupertino, as defined by the Annexation titled "Orange 87-02";
Thence East 105.15 foet along the Northerly line of said "Orauge 87-02" Annexation to
the point of beginning.
Containing 0.121 acre, more or less.
APN: 357-15-01~
Revision date: 04-16-01
EXHIBIT "B"
PROPOSED ANNEXATION
TO THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
ENTITLED
'ORANGE AVE. 0~-05'
---~r--"~
RESOLUTION NO. 01-130
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY coUNcIL OF TU~ CITY OF CUPERTINO
MAKING DETERMINATIONS AND APPROVING ~ REORGANIZATION
OF TERRITORY DESIGNATED "ORANGE AVENUE 01-03' PROPERTY
LOCATED BETWEEN LOMITA AVENUE AND ALMADEN AVENUE
APPROXIMATELY 0.121 ACRE, VEMULPALLI AND TALASILA
(APN 357-15-013)
WHEREAS, a petition for the annexation of certain t~iitory to the City of
Cupertino in the County of Santa Clara consisting of 0.121+ acre on the west side of
Orange Avenue (APN 357-15-013) has been filed by property owner V~,,,alpalli and
Talasila; and
WHEREAS, on May 21, 2001, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 01-115
initiating proceedings for annexation of the area designated "Orange Avenue 01-03"; and
WHEREAS, said teivitory is uninhabited and all owners of land included in the
proposal consent to this annexation; and
WHERP_.AS, Section 35150.5 of the California Government Code states that the
Local Agency Formation Commission shall not have any authority to reahew au
annexation to any City in Santa Clara County of unincorporated territory which is within
the urban service area of the city of the annexation if initiated by resolution of the
legislative body and therefore the City Council of the City of Cupertino is now the
conducting authority for said annexation; and
WHEREAS, Government Code Section 56837 provides that if a petition for
annexation is signed by all owners of land within the affected territory the City Council
may approve or disapprove the annexation without public hearing; and
WHEREAS, evidence was presented to the City Council;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Cupertino as follows:
1. That it is the conducting authority pursumnt to Section 35150.5 of the Government
Code for the annexation of property designated "Orange Avenue 01-03,'more
particularly described in Exhibit "A";
2. That the following findings are made by the City Council of the City of
Cupertino:
Resolution No. 01-130 Page 2
a. That said territory is uninhabited and comprises approximately 0.121
b. That the annexation is conaistent with thc orderly annexation of territory
with the City's urban service area and is consistent with the City policy
of snnexlng when providing City services.
c. The City Council has completed an initial study and has found that the
annexation of said territory has no significant impact on the environment,
and prc~ously approved the granting of a Negative Declaration.
d. The City Council on May 21, 1984, enacted an ordinance prezoning
the subject territory to City of Cupertino Pre RI-10 zone.
e. Annexation to the' City of Cupertino will affect no changes in special
districts.
f. That the territory is within the city urban service area as adopted by the
Local Agency Fmmation Commission.
g. That the annexation is made subject to no terms and conditions.
h. That the County Surveyor has det~,,,irted the boundaries of the proposed
annexation to be definite and certain, and in compliance with the
Commission's road annexation policies. The City shall reimburse the
County for actual costs incurred by the County Surveyor in rosldng this
detcrminstion.
i. That the proposed annexation does not create islands or areas in which it
would be difficult to provide municipal services.
j. That the proposed annexation does not split line of assessment of
ownership.
k. That the proposed annexation is consistent with the City's General Plan.
1. That the City has complied with all conditions imposed by the
commission for inclusion of the territory in the Ci/y's urban service area.
m. That the territory to be annexed is contiguous to existing City limits under
pwvisions of the Governmcnt Code.
3. That said annexation is hereby ordered without election pursuant to Section 35151
et seq. of the Government Code.
Resolution No. 01-130 Page
-- 4. That the Clerk of the City Council of the City of Cupertino is directed to give
notice of said annexation as prescribed by law.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that upon oompletion of these reorganization
proceedings the territory nnnoxed will be detached from the Santa Clara County Lighting
Service District.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City
of Cupertino this __ day of June, 2001 by the following vote:
Vote Members of the City Council
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST: APPROVF~D:
City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupertino
10300 Torte Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014-3255
Telephone: (408) 777=~213
CITY OF ~AX: (40S) ~?Tal0~
CUPER!INO HUMAN RESOURCES DMSION
Summary
AgcndaltemNo. ~0 Meeting Date: June 18, 2001
SUBJ'~CT:
Terms and conditions of employment for fiscal year 2001/02.
BACKGROUND:
The City Council acts on an annual basis with respect to the adoption of salaries and other
terms and conditions of employment. The attached resolutions amend employee salaries and
health benefits pursuant to current memorandums of understanding (MOU's):
A. Resolution 01- I}[ amends the Listing of Classifications and Salary Ranges.
In July 1999, the City Council approved three year MOU's which included total
compensation adju~huents of no less than 3.0% and no more than 5.0% effective the
pay period in which July 1, 2001 occurs. Total compensation adjustments are based on
the Bay Area Consnmer Price Index (CPI) for the year ending April 2001. The CPI was
5.8% providing for the maximum 5.0% adjustment to total compensation.
This 5% adju~huent for employees represented by Operating Engineers, Local 3,
includes a 4.5% salary increase, an additional $50 in monthly medical benefits, and a
$25 per year safety equipment allowance increase. The adju-huent for employees
represented by the City Employees' Association and for unrepresented employees
consists of a 4.6% salary increase and an additional $50 in monthly medical benefits.
In existing MOU's, the City further ag~es to survey cities in Santa Clara County to
ensure that Cupertino's total compensation is within the highest fottr cities. This survey
identiBes one additional equity adjustment of 12.4% for Code Enforcement Officers.
All other benchmarked classes are compensated within the highest four cities.
B. Resolution 01- ~ ~, fixes the Employer's Conlxibution for medical and hospitnli~tion
insurance pursuant to the Meyers-Geddes State Employees Medical and Hospital Care
Act. Every year, agencies conUacting for medical insurance through the State of
California are required to approve a resolution identifyin~ contributions for each
employee group. City health benefit contributions were determined during the most
recent negotiations in 1999.
Printed on Recycled Paper
Tei-n:$ & Conditions of Employment
June 18, 2001
Page 2
C. Resolution 01- ]~ amends the compensation program for unrepresented employees.
Policy No. 7 is amended to increase the medical insurance benefit to $620.00 monthly,
a $50 per m6nth increase.
The salary and benefit adjustments included in the above resolutions are within previously
negotiated City Council parameters for total compensation and are included in the FY 2001/02
budget.
Recommendation:
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution Nos. 01- I$[ to 01- ~ 3~ as
described herein.
Submitted by: Approved for Submission:
Sandy Abe David W. Knapp
Human Resources Manager City Manager
RESOLUTION NO. 01-131
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CUPERTINO AMENDING THE LISTING OF CLASSIFICATIONS
AND SALARY SCHEDULE
WHEREAS, the listing of classifications and salary schedule is periodically
amended to reflect changes in the annual budget, organizational structure, or memoranda
· of understanding; and
WHEREAS, the recruitment, hiring and retention of top q-Ality employees are
essential to the efficient operation of the City of Cupertino.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Listing of Classifications and
Salary Schedule is amended as shown in AttRe. hment "A" which is incorporated in this
resolution by refi.-~-'nce.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular City Council meeting of the City of
Cupertino this ~day of ,2001 by the follow/nE vote:
VOTE MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST: APPROVED:
City Clerk Mayor, City of Cuper6no
Attachment A
City of Cupertino
2001 - 2002
Salary Schedule
June 2001
City of Cupertino
Std -y Sel edtde
2001-2002
Salary Range Approximate Monthly
Classifieation Unit No. Salary Range
,Account Clerk 3 !07 34964249
Accountant 2 122 4679-5687
Ac~oonting Technician 2 117 4341-5276
Admil~islxntiv¢ Clerk 3 110 3678
Administrative $,~ry 2 113 3896-4736
Assistant City Attorney I 131 5658-6877
Assistant Civil Engin~r 3 127 $238-6367
Assistant Planner 3 121 4576-$562
Asso~iat~ Planner 3 124 4932-5995
Building ~ 3 126 $224-6349
Building Official 1 134 6977-8480
Cas~ Manager 3 111 3790-4606
City Attorney I 138 12786 (F)
City Clerk 1 131 5658-6877
City Manager I 139 13947 (F)
City Planner I 134 6977-8480
Code F. nforcement Officer 3 115 4260-5178
Commtmity Relations Coordinatol' 2 120 4497-5466
Deputy City Attorney 2 122 4679-5687
Deputy City Clerk 2 113 3896-4736
Director of Admin Services I 136 8683=10554
Director of Corem Development 1 135 8161-9920
Director of Parks & Recreation I 135 8161-9920
Director of Public Works I 137 9770-11875
Engineering Technician 3 118 4462-5424
Environmental Programs Assistant 3 119 4494-5462
Environmental Programs Manager 1 129 5573-6774
Equipment Mechanic 4 114 3984-4843
Fncility Att~Ddnnt 3 101 2660-3233
Finance Manager I 133 6671-8109
GIS Coordinator 2 120 4497-5466
Human Resources Analyst 2 122 4679-5687
Human Resources Mn~ager ! 133 6671-8109
Human Resources Technician 2 117 4341-5276
Information Technology Manager 1 132 6454-7845
Maintenance Worker (T) 4 100 3128 (F)
Maintenance Worker I 4 104 3283-3991
Maintenance Worker II 4 106 3449-4192
Maintenance Worker HI 4 112 3801-4620
Network Specialist 2 120 4497-5466
Office Assistant 3 102 2939-3573
Producer 3 113 3896-4736
Program/Promotions Director 3 108 3547-4311
Public Information Officer I 131 5658-6877
Public Works lmpecmr 3 126 5224-6349
City ~f Cu~=~tln~
1
Ci~ of Cupertino
Salary $chedale
2001-2002
Salary Range Approximate Monthly
Classification Unit No. Salary Range
Public Works Projects Manager I 131 5658-6877
Public Works Supervisor I 126 5224-6349
Receptionist/Clerk 3 101 2660-3233
Recrention Coordinator 3 108 3547-4311
Recreation Supervisor I 126 5224-6349
Secretary to the City Attorney 2 116 4263-5182
Secretary to the City Mnnager 2 116 4263-5182
Senior Building Inspector 3 130 5578-6780
Senior Engineer I 134 6977-8480
Senior Engineering Technician 3 123 4810-5846
Senior Office Assistant 3 105 3287-3995
Senior plnnner 3 128 5290-6430
Senior Traffic Technician 3 123 4810-5846
Service Center Manager I 134 6977-8480
Special Pro,rams Coordinator 3 103 3264-3967
SU~'t Lighting Worker 4 109 3620-~. ~, 00
Traffic Engineer I 134 6977-8480
Traffic Signal Technician 3 125 5005-6084
Traffic Technician 3 I 118 4462-5424
Unit Designation Code '
1 Management
2 Confidential
3 City Employees' Association
4 Operating Engineers Local No. 3 ,
City of Cupe~no
2
Salary Step Listings
( pro ma e /ont/ ly la y}
Salary Steps
Salarv Ranne
100 $312S(F)
1Ol $2660 K2793 $2933 $3079 $3233
102 $2939 $3086 $3241 $3403 $3573
103 $3264 $3427 $3598 $3778 $3967
104 $3283 $3447 $3620 $3800 $3991
105 $3287 $3451 $3623 $3805 $3995
106 $3449 $3621 $3803 $3993 $4192
107 $3496 $3671 $3854 $4047 $4249
108 $3547 $3724 $3911 $4106 $4311
109 $3620 $3801 $3991 $4190 $4400
110 $3678 $3862 $4055 $4257 $4470
111 $3790 $3979 $4178 $4387 $4606
112 $3801 $3991 $4191 $4400 $4620
113 $3896 $4091 $4296 $4511 $4736
114 $3984 $4183 $4392 $4612 $4843
115 .$4260 $4473 $4696 $4931 $5178
116 $4263 $~77 $4701 $4936 $5182
117 $4341 $4558 $4786 $5025 $5276
118 $4462 $4685 $4920 $5166 $5424
119 $4494 $4718 $4954 $5202 $5462
120 $4497 $4722 $4958 $5206 $5466
121 $4576 $4805 $5045 $5298 $5562
122 $4679 $4913 $5158 $5416 $5687
123 $4810 $5050 $5302 $5568 $5846
124 $4932 $5178 $5437 $5709 $5995
125 $5005 $5255 $5518 $5794 $6084
126 $5224 $5485 $5759 $6047 $6349
127 $5238 $5500 $5775 $6064 $6367
128 $5290 $5554 $5832 $6123 $6430
129 $5573 $5852 $6144 $6452 $6774
130 $5578 $5857 $6150 $6458 $6780
131 $5658 $5941 $6238 $6550 $6877
132 $6454 $6777 $7115 $7471 $7845
133 $6671 $7005 $7355 $7723 $8109
134 $6977 $7326 $7692 $8077 $8480
135 $8161 $8569 $8997 $9447 $9920
136 $8683 $9117 $9573 $10051 $10554
137 $9770 $10258 $10771 $11310 $11875
138 $12786(F)
139 $13947(F)
City of Cupertino
Salary $chedtde
200~-2002
PART-TIMI~/TEMPORARY CLASSIFICATIONS
Classification Hourly Rate
Building Attendant 156.50 - 9.00
Crossing Guard 18.50 - 9.00 - 9.50 - 10.00 - 10.50
Intern !8.00- 12.50
Lifeguard 19.75- 10.25- 10.75
Ranger 16.00 (fiat rate)
Recreation Leader 18.50 - 9.00 - 9.50
Recreation Specialist 5.75 -22.50 *
Senior Lifeguard 11.00 - 11.50 - 12.00
Senior Ranger 6.50 (fiat rate)
Senior Recreation Leader 9.75 - 10.25 - 10.75
*A $0.25 increment between steps in range.
Appointment step is dependent on qualifications
of individual and assignmenL
city of Cul~tino
4
.-- RESOLUTION NO. 01-1:32
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF ~ CITY OF CUPERTINO FIXING
THE EMPLOYER'S CONTRIBUTION UNDER THE MEYERS-GEDDES STATE
EIVIPLO~S MEDICAL AND HosPrrAL CARE ACT
WHEREAS, Government Code Section 22825.6 provides that a local agency
contracting under the Meyer-Geddes State Employees' Medical and Hospital Care Act
(Act) shall fix the amount of the employer's contribution at an amount not less than that
required under Section 22825 of the Act; and
WHEREAS, the City of Cupertino is a local agency contractinl~ under the Act;
NOW, TI-]FA~FORE, BE IT RESOLVRD that the employer's contribution for
each employee/annuitant shah be the amount necessary to pay the cost of Iris/her enroll-
ment, including the enrollment of bls/her family members, in a health plan or plans, up to.
a maximum as set forth herein effective July 1, 2001:
Code Bar~alnin.~ Unit Cost Per Month
01 Manas=ment $620.00
02 Confidential $620.00
_. 03 Cupertino Employc,,-,~' Association $600.00
04 Operating Enginee~ Union Local//3 $662.50
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular City Council meeting of thc City of
Cupertino this ~. day of ,2001 by the following vote:
VOTE MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST: APPROVED:
City Clerk Mayor, City of Cuperfin.' o
· RESOLUTION NO. 01-133
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 00-185, UNREPRESENTED EMPLOYEES'
COMPENSATION PROGRAM, POLICY NO. 7, HEALTH BENEFITS PLAN -
EMPLOYER CONTRIBUTION
WHEREAS, City Council Resolution No. 00-18S, Unrepresented Employees'
'Compensation Program, s~t forth a numbor of policies, including Policy No. 7, Health Benefits
Plan- Employer Contribution; and
WHEREAS, the City Council desires to amend the Unrepresented Employees'
Compensation Program.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Cupertino hereby amends
Policy No. 7 to increase the monthly health benefits plan contribution from $570 to $620.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Cupertino this day of ,2001 by the following vote:
Vote Members of the City Council
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST: APPROVED:
City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupertino
10300 Torre Avenue
~.. Cupertino, CA 95014-3255
(408) 777-3354
CITY OF FAX (408) 777-3333
CUPERTINO
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
Summary
AGENDA ITEM I ] AGENDA DATE June 18, 2001
SUBJECT AND ISSUE
Approval of an amendment to the agreement with Winzler & Kelly Consulting Engineers
in the mount of $29,500 for additional services on the Bollinger Road Bicycle Trail
Facility Improvement Project for a total contract amount of $250,746.
BACKGROUND
On May 30, 2000 the City of Cupertino entered into an agreement with Winzler and
Kelly Consulting Engineers to provide development and design of the Bollinger Road
_ Bicycle Trail Facility Improvement Project. The City engaged this rum to complete the
original design of the minor bridge widening, which included field investigation, concept
design and preparation of drawings and specifications for a fee of $74,950.00. The City
later agreed to an expanded joint project with Santa Clara Valley Water District to
impwve and widen the Bollinger Road Bridge and roadway approaches and to increase
the fees to $221,246.00 for this modified scope of work.
During initial inve~igations by thc design team and a follow up site visit on April 4, 2001
by City staff, other interested parties and local agency representatives, some new design
issues were discovered that need to be addressed but are not covered by the existing
scope of services of the agreement. To address these issues, the City needs to authorize
the Request No. 2 for additiono! services dated May 15, 2001 from Winzler & Kelly
Consulting Engineers.
The additional services include the following items:
1. Additional geotechnical investigations are needed to address the removal of the
abandoned Old Bollinger Road bridge and ,n.emble embankments.
2. Because the City of San Jose owns and operates a sewer siphon under the existing
culvert at Bollinger Road, a new siphon may have to be designed to accommodate
the new lowered flow line.
3. Since this project will not be completed until fall of 2002, the City would like to
build an interim solution to the flooding ~t thi.~ location to prevent potential
dnmnge to local properties in the coming winter. The designers will provide plans
and specifications for a minor flood wall on the north side of Bolllnger Road to be
conslructed separately.
The total estimated fee for the above additional services is $29,500. The total conuact
amount including this request will be $250,746.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council approve the request from Winzler & Kelly
Coil,suiting l~.ngineers for additional services.
Submitted by: Approved for Submission:
Ralph A. Q~m!!s, Jr. ~ David W. Knapp
Director of Public Works City Manager
-- RESOLUTION NO. 01=134
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
AUTHORIZING EXE~ON OF IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE CITY A.ND DEVELOPERS 1~.7.& NOROUZ! AND FIROUZEH
HOVEIDARAD; 22771 STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD, APN 342-12-036
WHEREAS, there has been presented to the City Council a proposed improvement
agreement between the City of Cupertino end developers, Reza Norouzi and Firouzch
Hoveidarnd~ for the in.~allation of certain municipal improvements at 22771 Stevens Creek
Boulevard and said agreement having been approved by the City Attorney, and Developers
having paid the fees as outlined in tho attached Exhibit A;
NOW, THEI~.I;ORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Mayor and the City Clerk are
hereby authorized to sign the aforementioned agreement on behalf of the City of Cupertino.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Cupertino this 18~' day of Sune, 2001, by the following vote:
Vote Members _of the City Council
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST: APPROVED:
City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupe~dno
Resolution No. 01-134
Page 2
EXHIBIT "A"
SCHEDULE OF BOND, FEES, AND DEPOSITS
DEVELOPMENT: Single Family Home
Reea Nowuzi and Firouzeh Hoveidarad
LOCATION: 22771 Stevens Creek Boulevard
A. Faithful Perfom~nce Bond: Off-site: $14,000.00
On-site: $11,000.00
ELEVEN THOUSAND AND 00/100 DOLLARS
B. Labor and Material Bond: $11,000.00
ELEVEN THOUSAND AND 00/100 DOLLARS
C. Checking and ln~ection Foes: $ 2,130.00
TWO THOUSAND ONE HUNDRED THIRTY AND 00/100 DOLLARS
D. Indirect City Expenses: N/A
E. Development Maintenance Deposit: $ 1,000.00
ONE THOUSAND AND 00/100 DOLLARS
F. Stom~ Drainage Fee: $ 311.00
THREE HUNDRED ELEVEN AND 00/100 DOLLARS
G. .One Year Power Cost: N/A
H. Street Trees: By Developer
I. Map Checking Fee: N/A
J. Park Fee: N/A
K. Water MAin Reimbursement: N/A
L. Maps and/or Improvement PlaRs: As specified in
Item//23 of agreement
10300 Term Av~u¢
Cul~ino, CA 95014-3255
~ (4~) 777-33~4
CI~ OF ~ (4~) 777-3333
CUPE INO P~LIC WO~ OEP~
SUMMARY
AGENDA ITEM I ~ AGENDA DATE June 1 $, 2001
SUBJECT AND ISSUE
Resolution No.0H~g: Approval of Contract Change Order No. 2 in the amount of ($249.00) for
Traffic Signal Installation at Stevens Creek Boulevard at Saich Way, Project No. 9526.
BACKGROUND
On May 3, 1999 the City Council awarded a con~/~uction contract to Richard Heaps Electrical
Contractor, Inc. for the Traffic Signal Project at Stevens Creek Boulevard and Saich Way. On
December 4, 2000, the City Council approved Contract Change Order Number 1 (CCO 1) with
_ Richard Heaps Electrical Contractor, Inc. for the same contract. Since that time, another change
order is required for closeout of the project that includes a minor increase in the amount paid for
sidewalk replacement and a credit for the Emergency Vehicle Prevention (EVP) work. The net
contract change is a credit of $249.00.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 01- 115', approving Contract
Change Order No. 2 for Traffic Signal ln-~allafion on Stevens Creek Boulevard at Salch Way,
Project 9526, in the amount of ($249.00) for a total contract amount of $137,687.05.
Ralph A. Quails, Jr. David W. Knapp
Director of Public Works City Manager
RESOLUTION NO. 01-135
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
APPROVING CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER NO. 2 FOR TRAFFIC SIGNAL
INSTALLATION - STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD
AT SAICH WAY, PROJECT NUMBER 9526
RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Cupertino, Caiifomia, that Change Order
No. 2 for changes to work which has been approved by the Director of Public Works and this day
presented to this Council, be, and it hereby approved in conjunction with the project known as
TRAFFIC SIGNAL INSTALLATION- STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD
AT SAICH WAY, PROJECT NUMBER 9526
BE IT FURTHRR RESOLVED that funds are available and no further appropriation is
necessary.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Cupertino this 18" day of June, 2001, by the following vote:
Vote Memb~ of the City Council
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST: APPROVED:
City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupertino
,.~ ¢it~ Hall
10300 Torre Avenue
..- Cupenino, CA 95014-3255
(408) 777-3354
CITY OF FAX (408) 777-3333
CUPE INO
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
Summary
AGENDA ITEM ~ AGENDA DATE June 18, 2001
SUBJECT AND ISSUE
Extension of the term of the maintenance agreement with Tally's Enterprises for the
Recon~kaction of Curbs, C-utters and Sidewalk through June 30, 2002 in an amount not to
exceed $600,000, and;
Approval of a contingent amount of up to $125,000 for additional work that may be identified in
the second half of the fiscal year as approved by the Director of Public Works.
BACKGROUND
On July 6,1998, after competitive bidding, the City Council awarded a contract to Tally's
Enterprises for the recon~h action of curbs, gutters and sidewalk on city streets.
On July 6, 1999 the City Council authorized the conversion of the existing Public Works contract
with Tally's Enterprises to a maintenance agreement for the same scope of work to be performed
at unit prices in an amount not to exceed $400,000. This action was taken to ensure that the
Tally's workforce would be available and on-call in order to 'have this type of work completed on
a year-round basis. In addition, the agreement provides for one-year extensions for an amount to
be dot~i~ined by thc City on a year-to-year basis. This provision msintsir~ the contract unit
prices for the work with an snmmi adjushuent based on the Consumer Price Index. The
recommendation for an extension of the conlract involves an evaluation of the conlractor's
quo!ity of work and performance over the previous year.
Staff has evaluated Tally's performance over the past year and finds that they have consistently
provided high quality work in concrete repair and construction and have performed the work in a
timely way in accordance with City Stands~ls. The unit prices as adjusted for the CPI remain
competitive for this type of work, and therefore staff believes that it would be beneficial to the
City to extend this agreement for an additional year for the period ending June 30, 2002·
I
The proposed operating budget for 2001-2002 provides $750,000 for concrete repair. It is
therefore recommended that the Council authorize the City Manager to execute the agreement on
condition that the proposed budget is approved such that funds are available on July 1, 2001
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 01- [q~-. authorizing the City
manager to execute an extension to the Maintenance Agreement with Tally Enterprises in an
mount not exceed $600,000.00 for the period ending June 30, 2002 and authorize the Director
of Public Works to approve additional work as may be required by the City in an amount not to
exceed $125,000.
Submitted by: Approved for submission:
Ralph A. Qualls, Jr. ~ David W. Knapp
Director of Public Works City Manager
RESOLUTION NO. 01-142
A RESOLUTION OF THE C1TY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
AI_rrI-IORIZING EXTENSION OF MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT BETWEEN
THE CITY OF CUPERTINO AND TALLY'S ENTERPRISES FOR
RECONSTRUCTION OF CURBS, GUTTERS, AND SIDEWALKS
WHEREAS, the City of Cupertino has a year-round maintenance agreement with Tally's
Enterprises for Recon-haction of Curbs, Gutters, and Sidewalks; and
WHEREAS, the msinten~nc.o agreraaent provides for one-year extensions for an amount to
be determined by thc City on a year-W-year basis: and
WHEREAS, the provision maintains the contract unit prices for the work with an annual
adjustment based on the Consumer Price Index.
NOW,. THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the City Council of the City of
Cupertino hereby authorizes a extension of said maintenance agreement in an amount not to
exceed $600,000.00 for the period ending June 30, 2002 and authorizes the Director of Public
Works to approve additional work as may be required in an amount not to exceed $125,000.00.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Cupertino this 15~h day of Sune, 2001, by the following vote:
Vote Members Of the City Council
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST: APPROVED:
City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupertino
RI -SOLUTION NO. 01-136
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
APPROVING THE FINAL MAP OF TRACT NO. 9313, LOCATED AT
22020 HOMESTEAD ROAD; DEVELOPER HOSSAIN E. KHAZIRI AND
CHRISTINE V. KHAZIRI, HUSBAND AND WIFE AS JOINT TENANTS,
AS TO AN UNDIVIDED 2/3 INTEREST; AND MICHAEL M. AMINIAN, TRUSTEE
U/D/T MICHAEL M. A_MI 1999 TRUST DATED APRIL 23, 1999, AS TO AN
UNIDIVIDED 1/3 INTEREST; ACCEPTING CERTAIN EASElVlENTS; AUTHORIZING
SIGNING OF FINAL MAP AND EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT
WHEREAS, there has been presented to the City Council for approval and for
authorization to record final map of Tract No. 9313, located at 22020 Homestead Road, showing
cermln avenues, drives, places, and roads by Hosssln E. Khaziri and Christine V. Khaziri,
Husband and Wife as Jo'mt Tenant~, as to an Undivided 2/3 Inte~,st; and Michael M. ~,minian,
Trustee U/D/T Michael M. Aminian 1999 Truat Dated April 23, 1999, as to an Undivided 1/3
Interest; and
WHEREAS, there has been presented to the City Council a proposed a~-ment for the
construction of streets, curbs, and gutter~ and for other improvements, and good and sufficiant
bonds, fees, and deposits as set forth in Exhibit "A" having been presented for the faithful
perfomumce of said work and the carrying out of said agreement; and said map, agreement, and
bonds having been approved by the City Attorney;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVF. D THAT
a. Said final map of Tract No. 9313, be end the same is hereby approved.
b. The offer of dedication for roadway and for easements is hereby accepted.
c. The City Engineer and the City Clerk are hereby authorized to si~n said final map.
d. The Mayor and the City Clerk are hereby authorized to execute the agreement
herein referred to.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular mooting of the City Council of the City of
Cupertino this 18* day.of June, 2001, by the following vote:
Vote Members of the City Council
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST: APPROVED:
City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupertino .'
Resolution No. 01-136
Page 2
EXI-III:IIT "A"
SCHEDULE OF BOND, FEES, AND DEPOSITS
DEVELOPMENT: Hossain E. Khaziri and Christine V. Khaziri, Husband and Wife as
Joint Tenants, and Michael M. P, mlnlan, Trustee U/D/T Michael
M. ,h, mlnian 1999 Trust Dated April 23, 1999,
Tract No. 9313
LOCATION: 22020 Homestead Road
A. Faithful Performance Bond: Off-site: $ 72,600.00
On-site: $ 37,400.00
SEVENTY-TWO THOUSAND SIX HUNDRED AND 00/100 DOLLARS
THIRTY-SEVEN THOUSAND FOUR HUNDRED AND 00/100 DOLLARS
B. Labor and Material Bond: $ 72,600.00
On-site: $ 37,400.00
SEVENTY-TWO THOUSAND SIX HUNDRED AND 00/100 DOLLARS
THIRTY-SEVEN THOUSAND FOUR HUNDRED AND 00/100 DOLLARS
C. Checking and Inspection Fees: $ 5,500.00
FIVE THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED AND 00/100 DOLLARS
D. Indirect City Expenses: N/A
E. Development Maintenance Deposit: $ 3,000.00
THREE THOUSAND AND 00/100 DOLLARS
F. Storm Drainage Fee: pAID
G. One Year Power Cost: N/A
H. Street Trees: By Developer
I. Map Checking Fee: $ 543.00
FIVE I-IUNDRP_D FORTY-THREE AND 00/100 DOLLARS
J. Park Fee: $ 72,000.00
SEVENTY-TWO THOUSAND AND 00/100 DOLLARS
K. Water Main Reimbursement: N/A
L. Maps and/or Improvement Plans: As specified in
Item 23 of agreement
City Hall
10300 Torte Avenue
~. C-~no, CA 95014-3255
(408) 777-3262
CITY OF FAX: (408) 777-3366
CUPERTINO
SUMMARY
Agenda Item I {o Date: June 18, 2001
Subject: Recommendation to support Assembly Bill 78, sponsored by Assemblywoman Elaine
Alquist.
Background: Assembly Bill (AB) 78 is intended to enhance the admissibility of expert medical
testimony in cases of child molestation and rape when thc statute of limitations has expired. This
narrowly crafted legislation is supported both by the California District Attorneys Association
and the California Public Defenders Association.
In less than one percent of all sex crimes filed in California, the victims don't report for many
years. In these cases that fall outside the statute oflimitatious, the Dislrict Attorney can file
charges only if there is independent evidence that clearly and convincingly corroborates thc
victim's allegation. AB 78 deletes "clearly and convincingly" so that the same standard of a
"preponderance" of corroborating evidence that is used in all other California criminal law may
be used. No other criminal law in California requires clear and convincing corroboration of
evidence. The bill maintains the burden of proof for conviction to be beyond a reasonable doubt.
AB 78 will be heard, Tuesday, June 19~ in the Senate Public Safety Committee.
Recommendation: Endorse AB 78 and authorize the Mayor to send letters of support to state
legislators and staff.
Submitted by: , Approved for submission:
Rick Ki~son David Knapp
Public Information Officer City Manager
City Hall,
10300 Torte Avenue
~ Cupertino, CA 95014-3255
Telephone: (408) 777-3223
CI'fYOF FAX: (408) 777-3366
CUPER TINO
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
AGENDA ITEM NO. ~"/ MEETING DATE: June 18, 2001
SUBJECT
Hearing to consider objections to proposed removal of weccLs and brush and to order abatement.
BACKGROUND
On May 21,2001, Council adopted Resolution No. 01-114 setting a public heating to consider any
objections of property owners to the proposed removal of weeds and brush. After adoption of that
resolution the Santa Clara County Fire Marshall's Office sent notice of the abatement program and
· heating to none property owners on their notification list. A copy of the notice is attached.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Note pwtests(s) and adopt Resolution No. 01- [~'/ordering abatement of public nuisance.
Submitted by: Approved for submission to the
City Council
City Clerk City Manager
22 January 2001
The ru~ scesou will be upon us in a few short months, so we must now begin the nece~snry fire survival
prcparations to homcs and property. Y.our property, as r~ferenccd above, is locetcd within th~ Hazardous
Fire .'.Area of Cuperti~.. All prOlx~rties m the Haznrdous Fir? Area m'e being sent this letter. [f you have
alread~..a.d .tire, se. d ..the ls~u. es below, thank you for your onmmued effot'~s and please return the card noung
you wm ne outng me wont.
One of the most effectivc n~nsures provan to increase thc survivability of at stmctur~ l'rom a hillside fire Lq
thc ~-~ation of d~f~tudble space. This is accomplished by tunovin~ the native brush, native ve~e _ration, and
least clearance
dry ~r~.qs a distance of al 30 feet away ~'om your home.. Up. to 1_00. feet of defen_si .ble .spn~.
should be pmvJde~ for siopcs that e[__~__ 20~ Gu thc downhill side of.t?e s.~octu~.. It .~s fuso nmpo..r~nt, to,
remove Iow tree limbs which helps Mcvent a Ffr~ on the ~round from climbing up mm me canopy ox me
trees aipound yot~ home. Pleas: note that ornamental shmbs.an~, bushes are acceptable adjacent to the house
m~._d, preferably should be a fire-retard]mt type. Also, nny native brash that is removed should be replaced
with fire-retardant plantinss if there is a possibility that erosion may occur.
The Santa Clara County Fire Chiefs Association has devcloped the followi.n.& list of b~.th, rcquimd and
recommended Mcvcntativo ~. When corn.file .t~, these measures w~l/nm only .br~g your prope~'y
into campliance with tho applicable Fire Code mgulntJona, but will Br~afly reduce the rink of loss or dam~e
to your home in the event bfa hillside fire.
A. All flammabl~ vegetation must be cleared a Minimnm of 30 feet around structures. Ornaxnental
siL'ubiwnT and tr~_s cleared of dead leaves and branches.
B, RoSf~, eaves, and rain ~tt. ers mt*et be cleared of pine needles, leaves, or other dead or dying wood.
C. ~ree limbs shall be cut within 10 feet of'chinmeys and/or stovepipes. Deadlmtbs_h__a_~$inA overtbe
house or garage must be trimmed.
~. Olinoney ~ or flues shall he coverod wi~ a spark m'resting I/2' mesh screen.
Address shall he clearly visible for easy Identification in an c~y.
RlcC'OM MEN'F)I~n: (F-H)
PO'. Trees ! 8 feet or ,ntb? should be limbed 6 feet up from the 5,'oond.
Woodpiles should be stacked a minimmn of 30 feet ~om buildinp, fences, and other
combustible materials.
All vegetation and othe~ flammable materials should be cleared from ben_,,~th decks, l~levated decks
should be __-~__-!Osed with f'ue resLqtivo nmterials,
SENT BY: SANTA CLARA COUNTY PLANNING; 40// 279 8537; .JUh-14-01 11:02AM; PAG~ 2..',3
e~alos~J . . m~,a~um~ tlle~S A I~ ~-). On ~
W' ' · · F~" ~ ~ ~y ~
o~r m ~ m mnro~ w~ ~ ~m ~
,~ ~ wuzA wm ~ ~ plm ~ ~r ~ t~ Dill.
~ .-~ ~ ~ ~ t-~ ~ ~ to ~n~le ~ an~ ~o ~t ~ you ~ y~ ~ To f~r
, ~on ~ or 1-g~l
Si~y,
-- Dou~J~s G. Sporlcder
Fu~ Cl~ef
DOS:mc
Eaclosurc
908~IOS6VD~ID HCi~'I'FHa~O~[~ V~IDr~lHCl V~KINKA.LVS ~O-IZ-~ ~IOV'T~liVHE~L 0~2~I ~
City Hall
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014-3255
CITY OF Telephone: (408) 777-3220
CUPEI INO F~X: (408)77%3366
DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
SUMMARY
Agenda Item No. IS Meeting Date: June 18, 2001
SUBJECT AND ISSUE
Adoption of the 2001/02 City Budget.
BACKGROUND
The purpose of tonight's hearing is to give the public a final opportunity to ask questions
concerning City programs before adoption of the 2001/02 budget. A public hearing was held
during the Council meeting of June 4 to conduct a preliminary review of the annual budget.
An in-depth review of the budget document was presented to City Council at the budget work
sessions on May 23 and 30. Council discussed the general fund financial position, five-year
projections, departmental budgets, proposed programs and the five-yesr capital improvement
program.
Attached is a letter we received from Jean Gallup suggesting that Council shiR $3 million from
the Sports Center capital project to the Library capital project.
RECOMMENDATION
· Receive public comments.
· Grant a negative declaration.
· Adopt Resolution establishing an operating and capital budget for fiscal year 2001/02.
· Adopt Resolution establishing an appropriation limit for fiscal year 2001/02..
Submitted by: Approved for submission:
Carol A. Atwood Da~d ~. Knapp
Director of Admini.~tive Services City Manager
JUN ! 2 2001 iii,!
June 13, 2001 By
Gentlemen:
I feel compelled to make one last plea for you to make a change to the 200112002 Cupertino city
budget in order to go forward with the largest size library possible.
I know you have made valiant efforts to preserve most of the library budget by dipping into your
reserves and increasing the amount of debt you plan to carry on the project.
However, I would like to suggest that you shift $3 million of the funds earmarked for the
demolition and building of a new Sports Center to the new library in order to fund it to $22
million, the maximum amount authorized by 71% of Cupertino voters.
Before you reject this suggestion out of hand, please review my reasons.
We need the lamest ~ossible libra~. In his April 9, 1998 report, David Smith, the library needs
consultant, said,
' It is evident that the accommodation of library resources, the Introduction of new
technologies and the extremely high occupancy rate by members of the community far
exceed the capacities for which this 37,500 square foot building was planned. If the
existing contents and activities were placed in a building of proper proportions with no
change In current activities, a facility of upwards of 50,000 square feet would be
required."
Based on projected building costs, it looks as if the $19 million will purchase about 52,000
square feet. Since that report, circulation has grown by 28% to this year's new record of 1.6
MILLION items. The number of visits increased by 21% in the two years from 1996/97 to
1998/99. The new library won't even open it's doors until 2004. Imagine the growth by then.
Continually cutting the library's size is moving in the wrong direction. It's not just a new library
that is important, it's a workin~ library with some room for growth that's needed.
Priodty of Ca;)ital Projects: The Library waited for the Quinlan Center and then the Senior
Center to be completed. Why can't the Sports Center be allocated just the $1 million it needs to
rehab it to a minimum level of code compliance and wait it's turn for full funding. It is much
more likely that an additional $4 million will appear to allow it's full rebuilding than that the
funding needed for an immediate addition to the library will appear.
This Is the critical budget year for the slz® of the library. The architectural plans will be
drawn this year based on this year's capital improvements budget. Once the plans are drawn
and bid, even if the economy and City revenues improve it will be too late to increase it's size.
Therefore, please fund the library to the maximum possible.
Please, please, think about this. This is the biggest single capital project the city has ever
undertaken. Do it to the fullest possible measure from the beginning. Citizens now and city
councils in the future will not thank you for dooming the library to being too small the day it
opens.
Sincerely,
Jean Gallup
10356 Plum Tree Lane, Cupertino
RESOLUTION NO. 01-138
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
ADOPTING AN OPERATING AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT BUDGET FOR
FISCAL YEAR 2001-02 BY RATIFYING ESTIMATES OF REVENUES TO BE
RECEIVED IN EACH FUND AND APPROPRIATING MONIES THEREFROM FOP.
SPECIFIED ACTIVITIES AND ACCOUNTS AND SETTING FORTH
CONDITIONS OF ADMINISTERING SAID BUDGET
~AS, the orderly Administration of municipal gov~,,ment is dependent on the
cstabliahnlent of a sound fiscal policTy of maintaining a proper ration of expenditures within
anticipated revenues and available monies; and
WHEREAS, the extent of any project or program and thc degree of its accomplishment,
as well as the efficiency of performing assigned duties and responsibilities, is likewise dependent
on the monies made available for that purpose; and
WI-~R.EAS, thc City Manager has submitted his estimates of anticipated revenues and
fund balances, and ha.~ recommended the allocation of monies for .~pecified program activities;
NOW, THEREFORE, BB IT RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby adopt the
following sections as a part of its fiscal policy:
Section 1: The estimates of available fund balances and anticipated resources to be
received in each of the several funds during fiscal year 2001-02 as submitted by the City
Manager in his proposed budget and as have been amended during the budget study sessions are
hereby ratified.
Section 2. There is appropriated from each of the several funds the sum of moneY as
determined during the budget sessions for the purposes as expressed and eslimated for each
depa,haent.
Section 3. The City Manager is hereby authorized to A,4mlnlster and h~asfer
appropriations betwe~ Budget Accounls within the Operating Budget when in his opinion such
transfers become necessary for administrative purposes.
Section 4. The Director of Administrative Services shall prepare and submit to City
Council quarterly a revised estimate of Operating Revenues.
Section 5. The Director of Administrative Services is hereby authorized to continue
unexpended appropriations for Capital Improvement projects.
Resolution No. 01-138
Page 2
Section 6. The Director of Administrative Sel~ices is hereby authorized to continue
appropriations for operating expenditures that arc encumbered or scheduled to be encumbered at
year end.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Cupertino this day of June 2001, by the following vote:
Vote Mei~bers of the City Council
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
APPROVED:
Mayor, City of Cupertino
ATTEST:
City Clerk
RESOLUTION NO. 01-139
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
ESTABLISHING AN APPROPRIATION LIMIT FOR FISCAL YEAR
2001-02
WHEREAS, the State of California has adopted legislation requiring local jurisdictions to
calculate their appropriation limits in complying with Arlicle XIII B; and
~, said limits are determined by a formula based upon change in population,
(city of county), combined with either the change in inflation (California per capita income) or
the change in the local assessment roll duc to local nonresidential construction; and
WHEREAS, the local governing body is required to set an appropriation limit by
adoption of a resolution; and
WHEREAS, the county population percentage change 0.91% and the California per
capita personal income change is 7.18%.
In computing the 2001-02 limit, City Council has elected to use the city population
percentage change, and the California per capita income change was used, but the Council has a
riEht to change nonresidential assessed valuation percentage when the fiEUl'e is available.
NOW, THEREFORE, BB IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Cup~,/ino
hereby approves a 2001-02 fiscal appropriation limit of $$0,050,255.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Cupertino this 18th day of~lune 2001, by the following vote:
Vote Memb¢,'s of the CiW Council
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
APPROVED:
Mayor, City of Cupertino
ATTEST:
City Clerk
City Hall
'--' 10300 Tone Avenue
C['~ OF Cupertino, CA 95014-3255
CUPEI(TINO (408) 777-3354
F^× (408) 777.3333
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
Summary
AGENDA ITEM ~ ~ AGENDA DATE June 18, 2001
SUBJECT AND ISSUE
Annual Renewal of Fees for SWim Drainage Nonpoint Source program
BACKGROUND
Since 1991, the Nonpoint Source Program, mandated by the State of California and the
US Environmental Protection Agency regulations, has been funded locally by attaching a
-- stom~ fee to each property in the City. The fee is collected by the Santa Clara County Tax
Collector and provided to the City.
These funds support the City's mandated programs to prevent and enforce illegal
dumping and illicit storm drain connections. The operation and maintenance of storm
drain facilities (to the extent not covered by existing General Fund activities), water
quality monitoring, public infommtion and education, and regulatory revisions and
related tasks are also supported by these funds. To maintain the fund as a resource it must
be renewed by Council action every year to adopt the fee schedule for the ensuing fiscal
year.
Assessment Rate FY 2001-2002
· The fees have remained the same since they were lust levied in 1991. The annual fees for
each property category are as follows:
Category Rate ~ Year
Single Family, Town homes, Condominiums $12.00/premise
Commercial, Industrial, Apaz huents $144.00/acre
Unimproved/Recreation $36.00/acre
The fee schedule when levied on all properties in the City of Cupertino generates
approximately $350,000. The program has been budgeted at approximately that amount.
However, as noted above, because the fees have not changed over the years the funding,
while remaining the same amount, has diminished in value over time from the inflation of
costs. As such, while the program maintains the mandated regulatory and educational
programs, most storm drain maintenance and protection is funded from the general Fund
or (for new facilities) from connection fees.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Adoption of Resolution No. 01-I~D approving the renewal and collection of thc
existing storm drain fees at no increase in rates for Fiscal Year 2001-2002.
Submitted by: Approved for submission:
Ralph A. Quails, Jr. David W. Knapp
Director of Public Works City Manager
Resolution No. 01-140
RESOLUTION NO. 01-140
A RESOLUTION OF ~ CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
CONDUCTING AN ANNUAL REVIEW OF THE STORM DRAINAGE
SERVICE CHARGE
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Cupertino has previously enacted Murdcipal Code
Chapter 3.36 for the purpose of meeting the City's federally mandated Nonpoint Source Con, roi and
Stormwater Management Pro/~am and establishin~ the authority for iraposing and char~ng a sto~.
drainage service charge; and
WHEREAS, a report concerning the me,hod of assessing an environmental fee to fund the
City's nonpoint source program was prepared by the Director of Public Works pursuant to Sect/on
3.36.080(B) of the City's Municipal Code and filed with the City Clerk on May 23, 2001. The report,
entitled "Engineer's Report, Assesament of Fcc.; for Storm Drainage Purposes Nonpoint Source
Pollution Program", was prepared by the Director of Public Works and is a_~_ted May l, 2001; and
WHEREAS, this study was available for public ingpecfion and review ten (10) days pr/or to this
public hearing; and
WHBRBAS, the City Council of tho City of Cupcrtino finds and determines as follows:
1. After considering the report entitled "Engineer's Report, Asses~ment of Foes for StoL,,,
Drainagc Purposes Nonpoint Source Pollution Program" and the testimony received at this public
hear/ng, the City Council hereby approves the report and here/n incorporates it in the resolution.
2. There is a need in tho City for the continuation of a storm drainage service charge to
cover the costs of the federally mnndsted program as heretofore described, in that pwperl/es within the
city will not otherwise contribute their fair share towards this program and without tho availability of
such storm drainage service charge, tho City's general fund will be depleted.
3. The facts and evidence presented e~bl/sh that there is a reasonable relafion,hlp
between the need for this fee and the impac~ for which this fee shall be 'used, and that there is a
reasonable relationship between the fee's use and the properties which are to be charged this fee.
These relationships or nexuses are described in more detail in the above referenced report.
4. The amounts of the fee for each category of property, as sot forth below, are reasonable
amounts as such fees are based on runoff coefficients established in the Master Storm Drain Study,
which thc City Council hereby approves and herein incorporates such study.
Resolution No. 01-140
$. It is further determined that each and every parcel of land contRined in said report will,
and has received a benefit of the storm drainage systei~ and that the charges imposed herein on each
such parcel are in confom,ity with the benefits thst suah parcel hA.~ received as further described in the
report.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Cupertino, that:
1. Charge. The storm drslnRge service charge shall continue to be charged to each parcel
within the city to cover the costs of the City's Nonpoint Source Conlrol and Sto~u~water Manage~-~-~ent
2. Use of Revenue. The revenue derived from said charge shall be used solely in
connection with implementing and enforcing Chapter 3.36 of the Cupertino Municipal Code entitled
"Storm Drainage Service Charge."
3. Schedule of Char~es.
(a) Annual fees for each category of property will be assessed, and collected as follows:
Residential prumises $ 12.00/parcel
Apartment premises $144.00/acre
Commercial/Industrial premises $144.00/acre
Unimproved/Recreational $ 36.00/acre
Co) The following public properties are exempt from, and shall not be assessed the
Cup~,ilno Sanitary District
Santa Clara County
Santa Clara Valley Water District
Southern Pacific Transportation Company
State of California
The Santa Clara County Fire Depariment
The City of Cupertino
The Cupertino Union School District
The Foothill-De Anza Community College District
The Fremont Union High School District
The Midpeninsula Regional Park District
United States of America
Resolution No. 01-140
-- 4. Judicial Action to Challenge this Resolution. Any judicial action or proceed;ng to
challenge, review, set aside, void, or annul this resolution shall be brought within 120 days from the
date of its adoption.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino
this 18z day of~Iune, 2001, by the following vote:
Vote Me~ibers of the City Council
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST: APPROVED:
City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupel~dno
City Hall
~ ' 10300 Torre Avenue
CITYOF Cupertino, CA 95014-3255
(408) 777-3354
CU PEI INO F^× (408)777-3333
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
Summary
AGENDA ITEM 20 AGENDA DATE June 18, 2001
SUBJECT AND ISSUE
Monta Vista High School Studem Parking Pilot Program.
BACKGROUND
On January 16, 2001 the Council received a status report from the Monta Vista High
School Parking Task Force that positively supported the success of the pilot program in
the Monta Vista Area. The persons representing the Fremont Union High School District,
the Monta Vista Student Body and residents in the surrounding neighborhood all
indicated positive support for the extension of the pro~rarn through the Spring Semester
ending in June of 2001. A map indicating the entire current permit parking areas in the
Monta Vista neighborhoods is attached.
Everyone continues to feel that, up to this point, the conduct has been positive for all
concerned and everyone seems to support the continuance of the pilot program. The staff
at Monta Vista High School periodically monitors the permit areas (Hyannisport Drive
and Dolores Avenue) to ensure compliance and that the streets are safe. Residents and
School Staff report very few complaints since the inception of the pwgram.
Additional Permit Areas for Future Expansion of the Program
Also on January 16, 2001, in addition to the areas in the pilot program (Dolores and
Hyannisport) the Task Force, had requested and received support from the Council to
pursue other adjacent parking permit neighborhoods to encourage their participation in
the student parking pwgram in the following year beginning with the fall semester in
September of 2001.
The residential streets that the Task Force had identified with the most potential include
Fort Baker Drive, Presidio Drive, Wilkinson Avenue, Shattuck Drive, Santa Theresa
Drive, Byme Avenue, Orange Avenue, and Noonan Court. The Disulct and the High
School had agreed, with concurrence by the Council, to take the responsibility for
pursuing that option in those neighborhoods. The City staffwould continue to participate
in the Task Force meetings and monitor efforts of the Committee to extend the program.
The District conducted several community meetings to discnss this program with
residents in the additional streets (as noted above) that currently enjoy preferential
parking. Most recently the task force met on May 23, 2001 and many residents from these
affected areas also attended. The district and the City have received many calls and e-
mails, most all of which voice opposition to extending the program to the additional
preferential parking sweets.
The residents who attended the meeting on May 23 also expressed stwng opposition to
the pwgram on their streets. Numerous reasons were cited and many opposing points of
view were expressed. Most frequently noted by the residents was that they felt that the
School District had created this problem and was trying to "impose it on the
neighborhood" rather than dealing with it on site. Further, many residents expressed
concern over students being allowed to park on their streets, creating additional traffic
and "loitering", trash, etc. Although it was pointed out by the District, the students, and
residents now participating in the program on Dolores and Hyannisport, that these
concerns do not bear out in actual practice, the residents, nevertheless maintained a strong
opposition to the program in their neighborhoods.
Conclusion: Three Alternatives
Following the May meetings and discussions with the Task Force Members, there appear
to be three alternative courses of action for the Council to consider as an approach to this
issue.
All-Voluntar~ ProRram
Following all these discussions and meetings the Task Force met again on June ?, 2001
and included several residents from both areas. After much discussion and evaluation of
all the concerns, the vast majority of the Task Force members agreed that the best course
of action, and the one which pwmised the greatest potential for success, would be to
convert the Student Parking Program from a mandatory requirement to a completely
voluntary program.
Currently, the pilot program approved by the Council for Dolores and Hyannisport
requires residents to provide one space for a student to park in front of their property
under the conditions of the program. If, for some reason, there are extenuating
circumstances a resident may fill out a request to be exempted from the program by
describing those extenuating circumstances. These could typically range from the number
of cars in their family, a live-in relative needing to park on the street, etc. These requests
would be reviewed and be approved based on their merit by the Director of Public Works.
However, with an all voluntary program, the Di. Uict 0VIonta Vista High School) would
solicit the interests of residents in all preferential parking areas in the vicinity, asking that
they volunteer to participate by allowing one student to park in fxont of their residence
Monday Through Friday during the day (the time that the preferential parking is in force).
No resident would be required to participate and preferential parking would continue to
be enforced in that area.
Mandatory Program
A second alternative would be to continue the current pilot program on Dolores and
Hyannisport and adopt a similar pilot program for the other eight streets through the
2001-2002 school year. If that alternative were selected by the Council, it would be
administered by the District in the same manner as the current program, including
contracts with each student for their conduct in parking in front of a residence and a
resident could request an exemption by forwarding the request and questionnaire to the
City for approval.
The task force as noted above expressed serious reservations about this approach noting
· -- that the opposition could impact the student parkers who would in effect be "imposed" on
unwilling residents and thereby unintentionally setting up potential conflicts in the
Community. Without exception all members of the task force believe that the paramount
importance should be placed on the relations between the school (in particular the student
parkers) and the community and feel that the mandatory program, at least under the
current circumstances, could harm that relationship.
Continue Pilot on Dolores/ttyannisport = Continue Efforts on other Streets
The third alternative would be to approve the continuation of the pilot program on
Dolores and Hyannisport for the 2001-2002 school year and to ask the Task Force to
continue its efforts in the community on the other eight streets throughout the summer to
try and gain acceptance on as many streets as possible. This would require that staff and
the Task Force report back to the Council prior to thc beginning oftbe Fall Semester with
results and appropriate recommendations.
Conclusion
Staff believes that the Task Force proposal for a voluntary program throughout the Monta
Vista area is the most prudent course of action at this time because it would allow the
Task Force to continue what appears to be a successful program and also to continue to
work with the Community to lxy and achieve a higher and broader level of acceptance for
the program in the future without the onus of the mandatory requirement.
Therefore, with the understanding that the Task Force would continue to be willing to
administer the program, including the solicitation of interest from the neighborhoods,
staff would recommend that Council endorse that approach. It is also be recommended
that the Task Force to report back to the Council prior to the end of the fall semester with
an evaluation of the results and any appropriate requests or recommendations for further
work.
The Task Force members have distributed flyers to all neighborhoods to advise them of
their request to the City Council for a voluntary program. It is expected that Task Force
members and residents will be in attendance at the June 18, 2001 Council meeting to
express their views.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Endorse and support the Monta Vista Student Parking Pilot Pwgram as a volunteer-only
program for all preferential parking areas on the streets shown on Attachment 'A' which
includes Hyannisport Drive, Dolores Avenue, Fort Baker Drive, Presidio Drive,
Wilkinson Avenue, Shattuck Drive, Santa Theresa Drive, Byme Avenue, Orange Avenue
and Noouan Court, for the 2001 Fall semester, and;
Report back to the City Council prior to end of the fall semester at Monta Vista with and
evaluation of the results of the volunteer-only approach with appropriate
recommendations.
Submitted by: Approved for submission:
Ralph A. Quails, Jr. Da~'id W. Knapp
Director of Public Works City Manager
wdl,- w~ P:I - uo~ e§uwo/uE~uooN/seJOlOO/~W,~] ~1 ~ ./~ ~--- - ~ ~
md~ - LU~/ p-I - UOIOJ ~S~N~ 'podsluUW[H ~
XI!'O (/quo .plsqPON)mdoe:£_...eg p-I - UOlN'~m:J 'podmuueX. ~ ° ' l/ I'1 II!_~/~---- ~
~ngaq~/.ee~ej..lue~/uo.uplllM/U~Oj. PlO/UeReH ~eN~.p!smcl/.e)le8 id ~
Iooqos eIPP!IAI _-- ~
~peuue)l ~-- -
~ . ~ooqos e~s!A e~uo~
~ .rue~ue,,,el3
UlOOU!'l PM U.llelOOlN
Kimberly Smith
From: Venkat Bommakanti [venkatboQyahoo.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2001 12:28 PM
To: sjamesQcupertino.org; rlowenthal~cupertino.org; dbumett~cupertino.org;
mchang~cupertino.org; kimberlys~icupertino.org; joehamilton~ifuhsd.org
Cc: courier~svcn.com; jrodrlguezQsjmemury.com; m eastus~hotmail.com;
MarshaG~cupertino.org; ford~iricochet.ne~; susaR..camilled~hotmail.com;
blevesqQix.netcom.com; Iirnons4~ihome.com; strether.smith~home.com; Leuler3~aol.com;
judywoo~aol.com; Steveg~yahoo.c, om;
UNEXPECTED DATA AFTER ADDRESSi~.SYNTAX-ERROR
Subject: So much forced-on so many by~o few !
Hi:
My name is Venkat Bommakanti, and I live at
ground-zero, the golden triangle of Ft. Baker,
Hyannisport & Wilkinson.
I am writing this to voice my vehement opposition
to the Cupertino's Monta Vista High School
Student Parking Program. I am one of the 7 distressed
residents of Ft. Baker Drive - a street with a 100%
opposition to this ill-conceived idea. The school is
being forced to move its parking problem on to city
streets.
The fact that over 25 streets (not just the 10/11
affected streets) have voiced unanimous opposition -
tells us how far removed the entire process has
become - from public opinion.
We moved into this city for its safety, quality of
life, schools and neighborhoods. Suffice it to say,
we are not opposed to the students, schools or city
council. We are, however, opposed to the manner in
which the whole issue is being ram-roded down our
throats - at the behest of one entity, the very
entity that is supposed to be our biggest
beneficiary - FUHSD !
They have, irresponsibly, chosen to do nothing about
this problem, even since as recent as 5 years back,
when the community brought it up. They have
conveniently hidden behind self-exempted laws - they
may have the law on their side, but it doesn't make
their stance, morally right ! They have a mandated
obligation to provide safe learning in their
schools' premises - not seek unsafe parking on city
streets - endangering other children ! We can help
pass a bond if need be - like we did with Measure
From what I gather, previous 'pilot' programs are
an utter failure. Present participants (on Dolores
& Hyannisport) are aghast at the manner in which
they were told to participate in a non-option
option. It was no fair choice. Mr. Ford's Black
ModelT comes to mind ! They were asked to pick the
lesser of evils - and now it's happening to the other
streets. There is no end in sight - as far as we can
see - this is a pesky perpetual program - spreading
its tentacles far and wide - time to nip it in the
bud !
As good neighbors, we wish to help all affected
parties - in arriving at an amicable s01ution. Just
as we intend to be good neighbors to the FUHSD, we
sincerely hope that FUHSD reciprocates. We are doing
~ lot to help the district - and wish it does its
hare ! They have caused the outright rejection of
every proposal brought to the table. It is amazing
that a beneficiary such as FUHSD, is afforded such
a carte-blanche veto right - and the benefactor,
didly-squat ! I thought this kind of thing happens
in a dictatorship or the third-world. But alas,
little did I know, we in the first-world are not
immune !
I have 2 children, 6 and 3 yrs of age. I fear for
their safety and that of all those other voiceless
children who walk or bike to the other 2 schools in
the vicinity. We are gravely endangering the lives
of these toddlers, by placating to the fancy of a
privileged few - driving is after all a privilege,
not a god-given birthright ! We are willing to put
a few students' comfort ahead of all children's
safety ! Granted, the school kids would have parked
by 8am - an hour before the kinder or middle-school
child appears on the scene. Have we been blinded to
the fact that peripheral vision gets acutely
hampered, with all those parked cars - what would
happen if a street resident suddenly came upon a
child walking in between the cars ? How would a
fire truck or an ambulance get to the scene on
time ? We all know these very situations of the
past. By the way, where are the Sheriff and
Firemen (and women) on this ?
· wonder who will take onus of a tragedy when it
happens - mind you, it will happen one day - and
then, it will be too late ! The entire city,
would become morally responsible, for the anguish
to the child, if still alive, their family and the
schoolmates.
Will this in any way calm the traffic situation in
the city ? Hard to believe, that a task-force spent
$40k seeking traffic calming measures, but could
only come up with such a brain-dead idea, that even
a kinder would be hard-pressed to accept !
Like a good friend of mine would say - we got this
all bass-ackwards ! If we were really concerned
with calm & safety, we would be doing all we can
to eliminate non-resident street parking in a
1/2 mile radius of all the 3 schools in this area,
not the other way around - as this Program
envisions.
I wonder who will be liable for any accidents ?
The student, the student's parents, the city,
the FUHSD, the school, or the homeowner ?
I won't be surprised, to be the one left holding
the bag ! So now, apart from subsidizing this
program, I'll have to go increase my liability
insurance - how fair can it get folks, in this
Nreat land of ours - talk about double whammy !
. don't have legal recourse, because none of
the contracts are enforceable - I am not
a signatory to it. But guess what, I'll get ..
nailed by the very 'considerate' parents of the
kid who parks in front of my house - should I .
make a mistake. What, equality ? Hell no !
On numerous occasions, I've seen parents (not
school kids, mind you) violate even the basic
driving laws - just to be a few seconds early.
Talk about dumb logic. They skip stop signs,
drive too fast, take illegal turns and exhibit
road rage. It happened here at our front porch,
and at Portal, right in front of our children's
eyes ~ and when parents set the example - it will
be difficult to make students meet a higher
standard.
Today the proposal calls for 300 spaces in front
of 200 homes. Tomorrow, it will be more, if FUHSD
has its way ! When will this end ? We are in for a
rude awakening ! Unless FUHSD wakes up and works
toward a comprehensive, forward-looking, long-term
time-bound solution, we will no longer have a
livable city. RIP Cupertino, it will be !
It is high time the FUHSD leads by example - and
influence the minds of young citizenry ! They
need to show us all, how they wish to contribute
their fair share toward improving the environment,
energy conservation, etc. If our family of 4 can
car-pool and do its bit, so can 4 students and
their families ! Just by 4 kids car-pooling, we
can reduce the number of cars by a whopping 75% !
Everybody'has to pitch in, folks. The kids can
park & ride, if need be. They can pay for the
privilege to be pampered. They could park in one
of the parks - and pay for its up-keep. They can
share playgrounds with Lincoln & Kennedy, and add
more on-campus parking in the freed up space.
They can open up eateries on-campus and obviate
the need to drive for lunch. They have numerous
options - but are they looking hard enough ?
FUHSD can look to other sister cities such as
Saratoga, and emulate - if they can't create -
a viable solution of their own ! If they can,
we can.
And this thing will rear its ugly head - all over
again - when Kennedy increases its enrolment -
we haven't seen nothing yet - because we now need
to deal with yet another district !
Is anybody out there, listening ?
WE HAVE A CRISIS, YO' ALL !!!
Hope there is a plan - god save us :-(
vote NO for this absurd Parking Program - You
will have voted a city's concience.
And if you have to vote YES, make sure your homes
and your streets are signed up first - do unto
yourselves, what you wish to do unto others !
Include the whole city - m~ke this a rotation
program affecting new streets every year !
Thanks for your time.
/Venkat Bommakanti
(A concerned parent, neighbor, taxpayer & voter) ..
Pagc I ol i
Kimberly Smith
From: Nevshimaza~iaol.com
Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2001 12:25 AM
To: sjamasQoupar'dno.org
Cc: kimberiysi]}cuperfino.org; Joa_hamilton~ttuhsd.org
Subject: Re: Parking Near Monta Vista High
Mayor Sandra L. James:
We live on Fort Baker Drive, just outside the back gate of Monta Vista High.
Each moming and afternoon of every school day, our street resembles the
loading and unloading zone at a major airport, with one row of oars pulled to
the side to drop off or pick up students, and another row of cars along side
them waiting their tum. AJI the while, students weave among the cars to get
to the gate. Just as at the airport, we suffer congestion, noise, pollution,
and safety issues.
At any major airport In the US confronted with a similar situation, sound
management and common sense would dictate a strict NO PARKING policy, with a
familiar sign such as:
"This Zone Is For Passenger Loading And Unloading Only. NO PARKING.'
The proposal to permit student parking on Fort Baker flies in the face of
sound management and common sense. It Is akin to putting long term parking
in the loading zone of an airport. I urge you to show your common sense and
your sound managerial judgment by rejenting the proposal to turn our streets,
which already bears the burden of being a majoring loading and unloading
zone, into a long-term parking lot as well.
Thank you for your attention.
Naoki Shimazaki
910 Fort Baker Drive
Cupertino CA 95014
Mr. andMrs. MarkC. Ruden ~ l! J~ ~//~l'
21927 Shattuck Drive
Cupertino, CA 95014-4791 f~!d~g~18 2001
408-252-8024
5/~1/01
Nancy Newton
Sandra L. James Joe Hamilton
Richard Lowenthal Randy Okamura
Don Bumett Kathryn Ho
Michael Chang Avie Katz
Cupertino City Council FUI-ISD School Board
c/o Cupertino City Hall Fremont Unified High School District
10300 Torre Avenue P.O. Box F
Cupertino, CA 95014 Sunnyvale, CA 94087
Dear City Council and School Board Members,
This letter is concerning the mandatory "Student Parking Pet,~,it Program," which
is proposed by the Fremont Union High School District, poorly outlined in a letter dated
to residents on May 15, 2001. I oppose the mandatory assignment of random students to
park in front of my property for the following reasons:
· The pilot program is a success only to those who previously dealt with
uncontrolled student parking because of non-permit parking.
· Your success story of the pilot student parking program represents a small
group of residents, not the larger group who see it as a failure.
· Our residences and streets are open to loitering, trash, vandalism, theft,
drinking, drags, and foul language with nobody but ourselves to perform
policing of the neighborhoods. In addition, the young children in our now
quiet neighborhood will be exposed to the concerns above as well as the
increased risk of injury from the additional tr~fflc and speeding, which will
happen.
· Our dog will bark endlessly from a stranger parkin~ and walking around in
front of our house. We already have a neighbor problem due to our dog
barking. An officer from animal control has visited us twice and we must now
keep our dog locked up in the house to reduce the barking noise. We have
gone to great lengths to ensure the barking is kept to a minimum or eliminated.
If one more complaint is filed with the county animal control, our dog will be
taken away. Ifthis happens, I will ask the School Board and City Council
members to explain to my child why this happened and who is responsible,
because it is not our decision.
· Our property value will drop when we disclose that, unlike other Cupertino
.-. neighborhoods, we must allow high school students to use the parking spaces
in front of our home.
In summary, the school board and city council memb~s are not in a position to tell
residents how their parking spaces will be used. I believe there are other solutions to your
parking situation and I do not have a problem if residents offer their parking permits to the
student of their choice, on a voluntary basis. However, to demand our parking space is
unacceptable and overstepping your power within this community. If you continue to
pursue this proposed program, I will continue to oppose all in favor with every resource I
have, including the ballot box at election time.
cc: Kimberly Smith - Cupertino City Clerk
CNONPL Citizen Action Committee Representative
Vice-Mayor Richard Lowenthal
Council Member Don Bumett /.~y.....~ - ~//
Council Member Michael Chang
From: Joyce Baron, 21847 Shattuck Drive, Cupertino, CA 95014
Date: June 14, 2001
Ref: Proposed Neighborhood Parking for Monta Vista students
I am very much against student parking near and around Monta Vista High
School, described in a letter dated May 15, 2001 from the FUHSD.
At present we have Permit Parking on our street. When we did have students
parking in the neighborhood it was noisy and we had traffic congestion moming,
noon and late afternoon. It wes a safety hazard when small children were
coming home in the afternoons.
Surely some other solution can be sought for the problem the high school has.
VVhat about Blackberry Farm? That is near to the school. Why should we
become responsible for the parking problem that Monta Vista High School
students have?
I do not agree that the 'Pilot Program" should be extended to streets that now
have Permit Parking. I certainly do not went my street to look like a parking lot
which is what happened before we had the Permit Parking!
I urge you all to consider another solution to this problem which the school district
seems to want to pass on to us.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
E. Joyce Baron
Kimberly Smith
From: Venkat Bommakanti [venkatbog~Hahoo.com]
---~ent: Wednesday, June 13, 2001 12:28 PM
o: sjames~cuperlino.org; rlowenthal~cupertino.org; dbumett~cupertino.org;
mchang~cupedino.org; kimbedys~upertino.org; joehamilton~fu..hsd.org
Cc: courier~svcn.com; Jrodriguez~sjmercury.com; m_eastus~ihotmm.com;
MarshaG¢~cuperlino.org; ford{~ncochet.net; susan_camilleriQhotmail.com;
blevesqQix.netcom.com; limons4Qhome.com; strether.smith~}home.com; LeulerS@aol.com;
judywooC~aol.=om; Steve~yahoo.=om;
UNEXPECTED DATA AFTER ADDRESS~}.SYNTAX-ERROR
Subject: So much forcecl'on so many by~o few !
Hi:
My name is Venkat Bormmakanti, and I live at
ground-zero, the golden triangle of Ft. Baker,
Hyannisport & Wilkinson.
I am writing this to voice my vehement opposition
to the Cupertino's Monta Vista High School (MVHS)
Student Parking Program. I am one of the 7 distressed
residents of Ft. Baker Drive - a street with a 100%
opposition to this ill-conceived idea. The school is
being forced to move its parking problem on to city
streets.
The fact that over 25 streets (not just the 10/11
affected streets) have voiced unanimous opposition -
tells us how far removed the entire process has
~become - from public opinion.
~e moved into this city for its safety, quality of
life, schools and neighborhoods. Suffice it to say,
we are not opposed to the students, schools or city
council. We are, however, opposed to the manner in
which the whole issue is being ram-roded down our
throats - at the behest of one entity, the very
entity that is supposed to be our biggest
beneficiary - FUHSD !
They have, irresponsibly, chosen to do nothing about
this problem, even since as recent as 5 years back,
when the community brought it up. They have
conveniently hidden behind self-exempted laws - they
may have the law on their side, but it doesn't make
their stance, morally right ! They have a mandated
obligation to provide safe learning in their
schools' premises - not seek unsafe parking on city
streets - endangering other children ! We can help
pass a bond if'need be - like we did with Measure C.
From what I gather, previous 'pilot' programs are
an utter failure. Present participants (on Dolores
& Hyannisport) are aghast at the manner in which
they were told to participate in a non-option
option. It was no fair choice. Mr. Ford's Black
ModelT comes to mind ! They were asked to pick the
lesser of evils - and now it's happening to the other
--streets. There is no end in sight - as far as we can
;ee - this is a pesky perpetual program - spreading.
its tentacles far and wide - time to nip it in the
bud !
1
As good neighbors, we wish to help all affected
parties - in arriving at an amicable solution. Just
as we intend to be good neighbors to the FUHSD, we
sincerely hope that FUHSD reciprocates. We are doing
a lot to help the district - and wish it does its
share ! They have caused the outright rejection of
every proposal brought to the table. It is amazing
that a beneficiary such as FUHSD, is afforded such
a carte-blanche veto right - and the benefactor,
didly-squat ! I thought this kind of thing happens
in a dictatorship or the third-world. But alas,
little did I know, we in the first-world are not
immune !
I have 2 children, 6 and 3 yrs of age. I fear for
their safety and that of all those other voiceless
children who walk or bike to the other 2 schools in
the vicinity. We are gravely endangering the lives
of these toddlers, by placating to the fancy of a
privileged few - driving is after all a privilege,
not a god-given birthright ! We are willing to put
a few students' comfort ahead of all children's
safety ! Granted, the school kids would have parked
by 8am - an hour before the kinder or middle-school
child appears on the scene. Have we been blinded to
the fact that peripheral vision gets acutely
hampered, with all those parked cars - what would
happen if a street resident suddenly came upon a
child walking in between the cars ? How would a
fire truck or an ambulance get to the scene on
time ? We all know these very situations of the
past. By the way, where are the Sheriff and
Firemen (and women) on this ?
I wonder who will take onus of a tragedy when it
happens - mind you, it will happen one day - and
then, it will be too late ! The entire city,
would become morally responsible, for the anguish
to the child, if still alive, their family and the
schoolmates.
Will this in any way calm the traffic situation in
the city ? Hard to believe, that a task-force spent
$40k seeking traffic calming measures, but could
only come up with such a brain-dead idea, that even
a kinder would be hard-pressed to accept !
Like a good friend of mine would say - we got this
all bas$-ackwards ! If we were really concerned
with calm & safety, we would be doing all we can
~o eliminate non-resident street parking in a
1/2 mile radius of all the 3 schools in this area,
not the other way around - as this Program
envisions.
I wonder who will be liable for any accidents ?
The student, the studentts parents, the city,
the FUHSD, the school, or the homeowner ?
I won*t be surprised, to be the one left holding
the bag ! So now, apart from subsidizing this
program, I'll have to go increase my liability
insurance - how fair can it get folks, in this
great land of ours - talk about double whammy !
I don't have legal recourse, because none of
the contracts are enforceable - I am not
a signatory to it. But guess what, Itll get
nailed by the very ~considerate' parents of the
kid who parks in front of my house - should I
make a mistake. What, equality ? Hell no !
On numerous occasions, I've seen parents (not
'--'chool kids, mind you) violate even the basic
riving laws - just to be a few seconds early.
Talk about dunfo logic. They skip stop signs, ' '
drive too fast, take illegal turns and exhibit
road rage. It happened here at our front porch,
and at Portal, right in front of our children's
eyes - and when parents set the example - it will
be difficult to make students meet a higher
standard.
Today the proposal calls for 300 spaces in front
of 200 homes. Tomorrow, it will be more, if FUHSD
has its way ! When will this end ? We are in for a
rude awakening ! Unless FUHSD wakes up and works
toward a comprehensive, forward-looking, long-term
time-bound solution, we will no longer have a
livable city. RIP Cupertino, it will be !
It is high time the FUHSD leads by example - and
influence the minds of young citizenry 2 They
need to show us all, how they wish to contribute
their fair share toward improving the environment,
energy conservation, etc. If our family of 4 can
car-pool and do its bit, so can 4 students and
their families ! Just by 4 kids car-pooling, we
can reduce the nun%bet of cars by a whopping 75% 2
Everybody has to pitch in, folks. The kids can
park & ride, if need be. They can pay for the
privilege to be pampered. They could park in one
'~f the parks - and pay for its up-keep. They can
hare playgrounds with Lincoln & Kennedy, and add
more on-campus parking in the freed up space.
They can open up eateries on-campus and obviate
the need to drive for lunch. They have numerous
options - but are they looking hard enough ?
FUHSD can look to other sister cities such as
Saratoga, and emulate - if they can't create -
a viable solution of their own 2 If they can,
we can.
And this thing will rear its ugly head - all over
again - when Kennedy increases its enrolment -
we haven't seen nothing yet - because we now need
to deal with yet another district !
Is anybody out there, listening ?
WE HAVE A CRISIS, YO' ALL 22!
Hope there is a plan - god save us :-(
Vote NO for this absurd Parking Program - You
will have voted a city's ¢oncience.
And if you have to vote YES, ~ke sure your homes
and your streets are signed up first - do unto
yourselves, what you wish to do unto others 2
Include the whole city - make this a rotation
~program affecting new streets every year 2
hanks for your time.
/Venkat Bommakanti
(A concerned parent, neighbor, taxpayer & voter)
Kimberly Smith
From: SudhirW~aol.corn
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2001 11:20 PM
To: sjamesC~cupertino.org; rtowenthal~}cupertlno.org; dbumett~cupertino.org;
mchang~cupertino.org; joe hamilton{~}fuhsd.org
Cc: kimbertys~mupertino.org; S~dhirW~aol.com
Subject: Oppose Street Parking for Students I
Dear Sir/Madam,
I am writing this letter to oppose using Cupertino streets for school parking.
I & my.family have lived on Dryden Ave for the last 6 years. During this time,
w/o student parking being there, I have encountered the following unpleasent
situations
· Teenagers driving their cars very fast. The corner I live on has a lot of
children
ages 6-12 and they are playing outside and a small mistake by these speeding
drivers could prove fatal. I have seen teenagers driving fast during daytime
as
well as at midnight. Because of this traffic, I am planning to request a sign
on
Rucker approaching Dryden informing drivers to slow down since children are
playing.
· I have seen beer bottles as well as half-used six-packs on my fron~ lawn.
· On one occassion, I picked up underwear dumped near my front lawn. I have
also seen some clothing stuffed in a 6-pack carton on my front lawn.
Since Dryden curves, it is almost like a cul-de-sac. This is one of the
attractions
of Dryden for people living here. Many people bought properties here with the
knowledge of this advantage. The city and school district cannot destroy this.
By allowing permit parking on Dryden or around it, you are effectively
destroying
the very appeal Dryden had for property buyers in the first place.
I am in general opposed to asking residents to pitch-in for parking. I think
it
is totally unfair on the part of the City/School_district to the expand
schools
w/o planning for parking ! I am sure you wouldnt do this for a business. I
think
you should look for another solution that doesnt involve using city streets.
Sincerely,
Sudhir & Nina Walvekar
Kimberly Smith
From: MAK [makimm~}alum.calberkeley.org]
'--'~nt: Tuesday, June 12, 2001 7:46 PM
~: sjames~}cupertino.ofg; rlowenthal~cuperfino.org; dbum~pertino.org;
mchangg~cuperlJno.org; joe hamilton~fuhsd.org
Cc: Idmberlys~}cupertino.org -
~ubject: Monta Vista Parking Proposal
Dear Council and FUHSD Trustees,
I am very opposed to the parking proposal created for Monta Vista's parking shortage.
As a mother of two young children I am quite aware of the need for safety and adequate
transportation to and from school. It was because of this concern that my family and I
moved so close to Monta Vista High School. The higher housing cost was the sacrifice we
made to be close enough to the high school that driving would not be required. Imagine my
surprise to hear that I now have to sacrifice again just to accommodate those families who
could not get a home as close to the school.
I have heard the argument that the streets are public domain, and that everyone has a
right to use them. Then why is it that a student will be "assigned" with privileges to
park 7 days a week? Why is it their privileges would take precedence over any need I may
have to park in front of my home? Does it make any sense to you that a taxpaying property
owner should have less access to use a "public area" than a non-taxpaying student that may
not even be a city resident?
From the neighborhood committee I have heard a number of alternatives for the parking
problem (parking at Blackberry Farm, parking at Measurex, school buses). These ideas need
to be explored further, but at a minimum these demonstrate an attempt to find a permanent
solution. I have yet to hear of any City plans or District plans to permanently resolve
the situation. If I believed that the current proposal was indeed temporary, I could
--cquiesce. However the wording states a MINIMUM of six years with no fixed ending date.
As a graduate of Monta Vista High School, I can attest that parking at the school was
not a necessity for attendance. It was a nicety to have the option to park at the school,
but if the parking lot was full so be it. Guaranteed parking usually does not exist in
the real world. Sinoe the majority of students driving will be entering the real world
soon enough, they might as well understand that concept now. Walking a few blocks is
nothing compared to what some of the students will need to do if they attend college.
Even the finest Universities have minimal parking on campus, meaning the student
population may walk up to a mile with their books in tow.
It would be wonderful to provide parking for all the students driving to Monta Vista,
but the realities of overcrowded schools makes that only a nice idea. The current
proposal does not solve the problem; rather it shows a lack of forethought. Unless I.have
missed a major point, it appears to be a hastily thrown-together plan that the City hoped
to implement before anyone knew enough to disagree.
Sincerely,
Mary Ann Kimm
Shattuck Drive Resident
Put a little Cal pride in your life, visit www. calalum.org.
Get University of California and national news, stock portfolios,
sports, weather, e-mail, shopping and more. Go Bears!.
1
Kimberly Smith
From: Tim Limon [limons4Qhome.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2001 12:40 AM ..
To: Joe Hamilton
CC: Ge~ Longinetti; City Clerk; Council Member Michael Chang; Council Member Don Bumett;
Vice-Mayor Richard Lowonthal; Mayor Sandra L. James
Subject: What's your long term MVHS parking plan?
Importance: High
Hello,
My name is Tim Limon and I live on the comer of Byme Ave and AJcazer close to Monta Vista High School. Over the past
few years, I~e watched the students park in increasing numbers along AJcazar. I%'e had to deal with safety issues (a car
crashed into my fence), smoking, drinking, drug abuse and loitering. Now I'm being asked to permit the students to park
along Byme Ave as well. A shared pilot program yielded one-sided data that was presented to city council favoring the
plan. A recant poll by neighbors on Hyannisport showed 13 of the 19 residents were actually against the pilot. Many were
too afraid to speak at the council meeting. I will also oppose this proposal.
I feel that you are being' irresponsible. Of the 5 high schools in the district, only Monta Vista has inadequate on-campus
p_ark!ng. You ara now a.sking the c.'.~, to deal with your problem. That's just greatl (1'11 refrain from using four letter words)
i ne lesson you are teaching your Kias is to push the problem into someone elso's back'yard (or front yard). Remind me to
vote against you at the next election.
I must ask that you take responsibility and develop, communicate, and implement a long term solution for on-campus
parking. I will not tolerate irresponsibility. I will ask the council members and the students not to tolerate it as well.
-Tim Limon
limons4i~home.com
Kimberly Smith
From: Eurotext Mueller [eurotext~eerthlink.net].
Sent: Monday, June 11, 2001 1:31 PM
To: sjames~}cupertino.org; rlowenthelQcupertlno.org; dbumettC~cupertino.org;
mchangOcupertino.org; kimberlysOcupertino.org
Subject: Monte Vista Student Parking
Ladies and Gentlemen:
We are residents of Wilkinson Ave. in Cupertino who are required to take part in the Monte
Vista student parking program (one lot per household). For the essential reasons listed
below, we refuse to accept any student parking in front of our home.
1. High Traffic Already Almost Unbearable
The traffic situation around the ldonta Vista and Kennedy schools is traumatic. During drop-
offend pick-up times, it can take 10 - 15 min. to reach the next street crossing. The schools
are overcrowded, sufficient parking is not provided. Parents park carelessly on crosswalks,
in front of driveways and especially on streets where a ~)arking pe,mit is required during
school hours (that is to say in front of our homes). We have not yet seen police take care of
the illegal parking, which we do not understand and accept. We noticed an accident on the
intersection Wilkmson/Hyannisport at around 3:10 on June 8, where two cars hit each other
on the crosswalk (!), certainly not the first accident here.
2. Inconsiderate Behaviour
In addition, the residents have to put up with inconsiderate behaviour, i. e. sidewalks, flower
beds, and lawns used as garbage disposals, damages to residential properties (i. e. walking
on plants while getting in/out of the car), students speeding down streets, students lying in
front of properties on the sidewalks (waiting for their late parents), etc. This has become
even worse after the new gate at the Kennedy sports field was opened.
2. Safety
Due to the traffic chaos, it has become very unsafe for the younger children here who visit
Lincoln Elementary to walk to school without parential guidance (which many families in the
neighborhood do because of the intolerable traffic). Careless and inconsiderate behaviour
of ddving parents/students who are in a hurry to get home endangers the lives of the
pedestrians. On the Hyannisport crosswalk where no safety guard is provided, although
highly frequented, our son was almost hit by a car. The carsbarely stop to let students
cross safely.
Other neighbo~eed streets do not have safety guards, either (the only one we know of is on McClellan, across
Lincoln Elementary).
3. Environment
Where are the environmental aspects? Doesn't an increase of traffic affect our health and
our natural environment? How about energy saving, air pollution? Why is this not put into
consideration? We Californians have a great awareness of enviromental problems - just
think of all the regulations we have achieved in this respect.
There are various solutions that could be acceptable for all:
- Busses
In other areas of the country, bus transportation works perfectly well. In case of financial
problems, a good solution would be to have the students pay a monthly bus fare. This is
status quo in other countries - and in the US, too - where travelling distances to schools are
far greater than they are here. Busses are also one of the safest means of transportation,
which would surely reassure many parents of Monta Vista High School students.
- Other or New Parking Lots
Find parking lots (Blackberry Farm, De Anza College?) or build new ones on Monta Vista
premises. From these lots, the students could walk or even use shuttle busses. Walking
saves time, money and our precious environment.
- Car Pooling
At Lincoln, all parents are advised to car pool. There is an organization coordinating car
pools to Lincoln. How about applying this to Monta Vista students/parents, too?
To put it to a point:
Planned as neighborhood schools, Monta Vista and Kennedy are now already very
overcrowded. New schools might be the best solution. Student parking_in the neighborhood
is certainly not a solution - it just postpones it, meaning even more traffic scattered
throughout the immediate neighborhood of the schools, thus reducing our safety and basic
life quality drastically. The streets here ara not designed to allow either present or increased
traffic density. We do not want intermediate solutions, and we would very much appreciate
police reinforcement of illegal parking in our streets. Is not Monta Vista High School
responsible for capacity planning (parking, safety etc.) and for including these measures in
their budget?
We kindly ask you to take a look at the catastrophic situation in this school area on a
regular weekday, around 3 pm. Certainly you would not enjoy living here, puffing up with
these immense problems.
Sincerely yours,
Carolina and Dieter Mueller
10823 Wilkinson Ave.
Cupertino, CA 95014
6/12/01 -.
Klmbedy Smith
.._From: Nahrn-Wook Lee [nwleeQberex.com]
ant: Tuesday, June 12, 2001 1:44 PM '
· o: kimbedys~ic, upertino.org
C=: sjames~icupertino.org; riowenlhal~cupertino.org; dbumet~cupertino.org;
mchangQcuperUno.org
Subject: Vote Against
Dear Cupertino City Officers and clerks:
I am ask ng you to vot~ against the Monte Vista high School proposal to make
my ne ghborhood into school parking lot. This plan raises traffic
congestion, safety and enfon=ement issues as .we. II es~ ,r..eq._uiri. ng.disclosure
when I sell my house. I should not have to bear me aeoitiona~ a~verse
burden of parking lot for Monte Vista High School in addition to being the
primary route for parents and students K1-12 gettingto the three
neighborhood schools. Fremont Unio~n high School .Dis~ct .nee~. s to plan for
and regulate on-campus parking, eno should not delegate ~ne outy to the
neighbom.
Please vote against the Monte Vista high School proposal to make my
neighborhood into a school parking lot.
Please advise me if you will help us.
Best regards
Nahm-Wook Lee
902 Ft. Baker Dr. Cupertino CA 95014
Klmberly Smith
From: JYonemura~aol.corn
Sent: Sunday, June 10, 2001 11:20 PM
To: DKADART~yehoo.com
Cc: kirnberlys~cupertino.org
Subject: Student Parking on Neighborhood Streets
Joe Hamilton
School Board Superintendent
589 west Fremont Avenue
P.O. Box F
Sunnyvale, CA 94087
Dear Mr. Hamilton:
We have resided at the corner of Orange and McClellan since 1948. Over the
years, we have witnessed many significant changes in the neighborhood, the
most deleterious being the tremendous increase in traffic on streets ill
equipped to handle a continuous stream of cars. During the opening and
closing hours of the school day, we are virtual prisoners within our own home
because it is impossible to back out onto either Orange or McClellan. The
problem is compounded when the school holds activities at night or during the
weekends because of the additional congestion and traffic. The streets in
Monta Vista are too narrow to accommodate parking on both sides. Since there
are few sidewalks, pedestrians (including many small school children) will be
forced to walk in the streets, which is hazardous. In addition to the
traffic problems, the safety issues involved in this proposal have been
ignored and must be addressed before there are serious accidents.
We are adamantly opposed to the proposal of allocating parking spaces to
students on streets close to the school. It is not the responsibility of the
residents to resolve the parking dilemma created by the shortsightedness and
poor planning of the high school. The foremost priority of the School Board
should be to solve the ongoing problem of parking which will only intensify
as enrollment increases. Instead of new tennis courts or a new gym, there
should be serious consideration given to the construction of either a
multi-story parking structure or underground parking facilities. Not only
does the high school incur no financial obligations under its current
proposal, but it has cleverly foisted total responsibility for the parking
problems onto the residents.
A neighborhood activist explored the possibility of utilizing the 700 parking
spaces available at Blackberry Farm. This is a viable option which can be
implemented easily. Students can either walk or wait for a shuttle bus to
take them to school. We understand that this suggestion was not favorably
received because of the inconvenience to the students. When will the School
Board display the same concern for all the inconveniences the residents will
have to shoulder if students are allowed to park in front of their homes?
As tax paying residents of Cupertino, we are appalled at the prospect of
providing parking spaces for students who may not live within the school
district. What contributions are their parents making to maintain and
support city services? It is a privilege to drive to school and students and
parents must understand that in the future they may have to pay for this
convenience.
We have seen a diminishment in the quality of life in our neighborhood. It
is outlandish that our daily activities are increasingly being determined by
the traffic patterns on our streets. We are especially concerned about the
negative impact this proposal wall have on the value of our property. We
urge the City Council to reject this self-serving proposal by Monta Vista
High School and to seriously investigate other options that have been
presented.
Sincerely,
'--'he Yonemura Family
0491 Orange Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014
(408) 252-0740 (Home Telephone)
jyonemura@aol.com
l~a8c I o!/-
Kimberly Smith
From: Larry Dick [Larry-DickOHome,cem]
Sent: Sunday, ,June 10, 200'1 '1'1:09 PM
To: rlowenthalOcupertino.org; dbumattg~cupertino.org; mchang~icupertino.org;
kimberiys~cupertino.org; sjamesg~}cupadJno.org; jce_hamilton~ifuhsd.org
Subject: Student parking et Manta Vista High
Cupertino City Council
Sendra ,James,
Richard Lowenthal,
Don Bumatt
Micheal Chang
Cupertino City Clerk
Kimberly Smith
School Board Superintendent
,Joe Hamilton
Dear City Council Person and School Board Superintendent and City Clerk
We are residents of Cupertino and live within a few blocks of Monta Vista High School. We live at 914 Liberty
Court. We have recently leamed of the plan to allow students that drive to Monta Vista High School'to park on
the nearby city streets. We would like to express our displeasure at this idea.
We believe'that Monta Vista High School should provide adequate parking for students that drive to school.
This can be achieved by either expanding on site facilities or by limiting the number of students that are
allowed to drive to school.
CONGESTION
We are very ooncemed about the increased traffic in the area. It is already extremely difficult to drive in or out
of this area during the morning and aftamoon school commute times due to the heavy congestion. Havin~l
students parking on the residential streets will make congestion worse. We have seen students speeding ~n
the neighborhood at lunch time as they hum/to off campus fast food restaurants and back. Dense parking will
make visibility poorer and will make accidents more likely.
LITTER and LOITERING
Students at Monte Vista High School do NOT have a good track record of behavior. We have seen ever the
years the mess of litter that they have left up and down the neighborhood from the nearby 7-11. We do not
want to support a situation that gives a childthe right to a parking spot in front of my house and whereby we
become that student's personal garbage man.
As a neighbor of the High School we already have our share of students hanging out and loitering in front of
our house. It is not unusual to see groups 2 or 3 students sitting on the curb smoking during normal school
hours. I don't think we need to encourage this by placing easy access to an unattended automobiles at their
disposal,.
SPEEDING and DANGER
We have recently had spccd bumps installed in our neighborhood and still the cars can be seen zooming up
and down the streets without any effect. We would favor that the bumps be inc~-eesed in size, more added, or
perhaps even a dip could be dug into the street to further enhance the bump's efficacy. Ubiquitous student
parking in the neighborhood would only spread speeding problems. Students parking should be concentrated
into controlled parking lots and onto main streets so the attendant problems can be contained.
USURPATION OF PROPERTY RIGHTS
It is our understanding that if a student is assigned a parking spot in front of my house by the proposed plan
then he has a "RIGHT' to that spot. This would give him a priority to that spot and would force us, our guests,
any service people that might come to my house, etc. to yield to his RIGHT. We find that concept intolerable
and would never accept such a situation, furthermora, We question the legality of this proposal since we are of
Page 2 oi' 2
the understanding that the city street perking is essentially open to any legal parking.
If Monte Vista is going to continue to expand, then the school must be expa.n, ded to.fully .acc~. m .m, oda.ta .stu.dont
needs. The neighborhood is not pert of the school. We would pre.f?r..a solufio.n, sucnas nav. lng,m..e .s!u.aen?
park at Blackberry farm. We .understand that lack of aidewa, l.ks mlg.n.t ~...e. a proD~e..m...; ne scnool .~smct ana
the City should fund the development of sidewalks that WOUlO permit umizaaon m' mis resource. My
understanding is that there are adequate parking for many cars at this site.
WHO IS ACCOUNTABLE?
We request that you inform us of how the procees of d .a~,i. ding .h.mv the.s, e policy d..m::isio, ns are made and by
what agencies. We would like to know if envimnmemm impacts nave ~een consmere~.
ALTERNATIVES - BICYCLES / BUSING ! CARPOOLS
As our 'representatives in the City of Cupertino we would like .you to know that we .oppose. any plan. that per?its
student parking on residential streets. We would enceum, ge me coun. c. il to support rea!is, tic altem.aflve.s ?,u..cn
as bicycling and busing. We would further uq;ie children ce given pan<ing spots at the mgh schoo; only ff may
carpool with 2 or 3 othem in a car.
Respectfully,
Lawrence Dick and Mary Ellen Dick
914 Liberty Court
Cupertino CA 95014
Page I oI I
Kimberly Smith
From: GJim4GoodQaol.com
Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2001 1:13 PM
To: sjamesQcuperttno.org
Cc: kimberlys~cupertino.org
Subject: Against Monte Vista Parking Plan
Dear Mayor James,
I strongly oppose the Monte Vista High School proposal to use our
neighborhood as a parking lot for the following reasons:
1 .It will increase noise, congestion and pollution on our street.
2.It raises safety and enforcement issues, e~d
3.,~xx)rding to experienced realtors it will lower the value of our property.
I do not think it is fair or appropriate for the residents fo bear the burden
of this problem that is clearly the responsibility of the Fremont Union
HighSchool District to solve. I strongly urge the District and the City
Council to reconsider the option of parldn; at Blackberry Farm or any other
option that does not degrade our residenbal area.
Thankyou for your consideration.
JanetCiotek
21898Shattuck Drive
Cupertino,CA 95014
(408)725-8356
Kimbedy Smith
From: Steve Banoert [steveOmathworks.com]
--'.~nt: Thursday, June 07, 2001 11:18 AM
j: sjames~icupartino.org
Cc: kimbedysOcuperfino.org; HowenthalQcupertino.org; dbumett~cupertino.org;
mchangQcupertino.org
Subject: MVHS neighborhood parking proposal
Council Members,
I would like to state my objections to the Monta Vista High School
neighborhood parking proposal.
Situating three schools in close proximity was a nice idea when they
opened. A greatly increased student enrollment and changing habits on how
the students get to school has created a traffic nightmare for the
neighborhoods surrounding these schools. Forcing our neighborhoods into
being a parking lot is just adding insult to injury.
The city of Cupertino has very strict regulations regarding adequate
parking for business and churches for a good reason. The same logic
applies to the high school. If the city cannot force the school directly
then it can certainly do so indirectly thru the use of permit parking.
The proposed parking plan is not temporary. How anyone could possibly
think this is the case is hard to understand. MVHS will have no incentive
to spend its limited resources for an on campus parking solution once the
City Council approves the proposed parking plan. MVHS planners knew before
hand what their expansion plans would mean for student parking yet they
went ahead regardless. This is not something that just magically appeared
~-~ut of thin air. I can only assume that their planning counted on using my
~ighborhood as their parking lot. Needless to say I find this hard to accept.
Turning our neighborhoods into parking lots is dangerous to the home owners
and pedestrians. If one assumes an average of 1 car per four houses
currently being parked (probably higher) and now add one car per home for
the student we get 5 out of 8 parking spots in use. This creates a much
narrower street with reduced visibility for the homeowner trying to back
out of their driveway or pedestrians trying to cross the street. I've
heard many parents of students at the three schools state that due to the
traffic in the area they consider it too dangerous for their child to walk
to school. Adding yet another dangerous factor will only increase the
number of drivers in the area.
I would imagine that there are a nua~ber of other possible solutions to the
MVHS parking problem. Most of the solutions are in the domain of the
school. One solution the city could offer is to use the parking lot that
is little used during the school year and close at hand, namely BlackBerry
Park. I've heard that the students consider this to much of a walk. If
you consider the actual path a student has to take to get from a
neighborhood parking spot to the closest building on campus you'll find
that more than half of the proposed neighborhood parking spots are further
away than the .2 miles to the BlackBerry park parking lot.
Thank You for considering my objections to the parking plan.
Steve Bangert
10842 Wilkinson Ave.
Original N~ge---
From: Bob [mallto:nnunkOhome.com]
Sent: Friday, June 0l, 2001 3:26 PM
To: Idmberlys@cuperlino.o~
Subject: Neighborhood Parking Lot?
City Cterk
I am against the student-parking proposal fOr the residents near end around Monta Vista
high School that is described in a letter dated May 15th, 2001 from FUHSD.
This is a problem for the FUHSD and Monta Vista High School to deal with not to be
dumped on the surrounding neighborhoods. There seems to have been some very poor
planning done by thc school disirict and the high school as for future needs, seems to ring of
thc "energy crisis"., What happened to the taxes paid by the property owners of thc area,
obviously not used m a way that would have easily foreseen this problem. To just arbitrarily
decide.that the neighborhood streets will become school parking is an easy way out of this
problem. Pilot program or not, who decided that this program was successful, the
neighborhoods impacted, FUHSD or the city council? I haven't heard of any poll going around
the neighborhoods concerning this pilot program.
IMPACT ON EFFECTED PROPERTIES
One of the most devastating repercussions from this neighborhood parking lot proposal
· is the devaluation of the property, up to 10%, impacted by this. Thc President of thc San ~osc
Real Estate Board has stated that this would cause a 75% decrease in marketability fer our
homes when this is shown in the "required disclosure form" from the seller. Thus the seller
· would be forced to reduce the price of the home to be able to sell it. This has already been
shown to be true on a recent in progress purchase in this area.
Next is the traffic congestion: I live on Orange Ave. end it is a speedway every
morning and afternoon during the week. People going to and dropping off at MVHS and
Lincoln Blcmcntary School, as well as othar people using Orange as the short cut to Stevens
Creek. There have been several proposals to the city fi'om the residents of Orange Ave. to
install speed bumps to slow down the traffic, way in excess of the 2$mph speed limit, denied.
But we should accept thc City's pwposal without any qualms. Traffic control is almost non-
existent seeing the police or sheriffs deparlment here for' traffic conirol is a rarityl
If this proposal was put into effect, students p . .arising on b?.th sides or. ev,,~c one.side of
Orange Ave. would narrow the open road for traffic'and lnorease me oangar to · emenu~
school students, bicyclists, and local pedestrians that travel along the sides of Orange Ave.
Orange is already dangerous but your proposal will m_.~ke it suicirl-l.
Then therc is the question of who cl .ca~. up the after the students tha. t.ar~, ass. ign,ed to,
these parking spots? Who is going to control the hanging out before school, outing lunch, ano
after school? Who is going to assure that the student parks so the remaining area is useable by
other vehicles, i.e. friends visiting, customers to home businesses, etc? Who gets themoney
for the parking permits?
What alternatives have bccn looked at, none? The City performed a "Traffic Calming"
study that acknowledges the unique three schools neighborhood. Have any of the
recommendations b~ followed or oven considered? What about Blackberry Farm, city
property, it has a huge parking lot not used duri~ ~ehool hours. I have heard that there are up
to 700 parking spaces there and close enough to MVHS that the students would not have far to
walk. Easily controlled because all of the needed parking spots arc in one place. Another
possibility, McClellan Ranch Park, again city property, use that area for MVHS parking. Or
how about all of the athletic fields behind MVHS, usc some of that space.
Car pool, if the 300 people who need park/nE spaces would car pool with at least 3
people now only 100 spaces are needed, plus now saving energy. School buses, that would
eliminate the need all together plus lessen the traffic congestion on McClellan and other
surrounding streets. Or lets put the responsibility where it belongs, on the parents' of these
students, bring them to school and pick them up. Problem resolved where it should be resolved
not dropped on the neighborhoods.
In conclusion the proposal from FUHSD is ~n assault on the property owners and their
rights as citizens of Cuperthm. Would you openly accept the same proposal for your slreet?
Think shout the other parties' position and how you would feel before making such decisions.
Robert M Harvey
Prope~y Owner
10300 Orange Ave.
Cupertino, CA 95014
408-861-0275
rmunkl~home.com
Kimberly Smith
From: SGHill~}aol.com
Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2001 12:27 AU
To: kimberlys~cupertino.org
Subject: Monte Vista HS Parking Issue Before City Council
This letter states the reasons for my opposition to the plan promoted by
Monta Vista High School to revoke the existing Permit Parking plan on
Presidio Drive.
1. The street is ~oo narrow to allow solid parking. When cars are parked on
both sides of the street, there is a tight squeeze for moving vehicles to
pass by each other. That is, the spacing is quite tight with four cars
abreast, curb-to curb. Permitting Monta Vista students to Dark on Presidio
would exacerbate the existing traffic safety problems.
2. Presidio Drive residents petitioned the City in the 1980s to institute
the Permit Parking system because they were fed up with the issues
encountered with using the street for a high school parking lot. Such issues
included teenagers loitering around their cars before and after school and
during lunch, litter (including cigarette butts), drug dealing and extra
street traffic. I do NOT want the City to succun~b to pressure by the Monta
Vista to change the Permit Parking plan. Keep the status quo.
3. Monta Vista High School is.blessed with a large parcel of land. The
literature they distributed to the neighborhood is silent regarding any
serious study they have conducted to add more parking capacity on their
property. Land use experts should pursue this option.
4. Monta Vista High School has rejected using nearby parking lots at
Blackberry Farm and ones offered by Measurex. Why should the Monta Vista be
allowed to turn my street into a parking lot when they have rejected other,
viable alternatives?
5. The close proximity of three schools in our neighborhood creates
significant traffic jams in the morning and afternoon. Converting Presidio
Drive into a high school parking lot will simply add more car trips ~n top of
this gridlock. This is irresponsible planning. The City should be working
on ameliorating the traffic problem, not making it worse.
6. Here are questions to ask the Fremont Union High School District:
Why would you increase student census at Monta Vista HS when the campus does
not have enough parking for the current enrollment?
Why aren't new parking lots in your capital plans?
Why are you purposefully demising parking lots, exacerbating the issue of
negative neighborhood impact?
Why is Monta Vista High School the only campus in the FUHSD that has
insufficient on-campus parking?
Do NOT turn my neighborhood into a high school parking lot.
Respectfully,
Stephen Hill
-esidio Drive
Original M~e---
From: Lynett Wells [mallto:lwellsOihot. com]
~ent: Wednesday, ~une 06, 2001 ~0:4S PM
To: sjamesOcupe~ino.onJ; dowenthalOcupe~dno.onJ; dbumettOcupertino.org;
mchangOcuperUno.org; kimberlysOcuperUno.org; joe_hamiltonOfushsd.org;
randy_okamuraOfushsd.org; avie_katzOfushsd.org; kat~n_ohOfuhsd.o~j;
nancy_newtonOfuhsd.o~J; homer_tongOfuhsd.on;
Subject: Monta Vista High School Parking Problem.
I live five houses from Monta Vista High School on Presidio Dr. and have been a
homeowner in the same house since 1964. My husband and I have paid our taxes and
have supported the school bonds.
I was very surprised and not pleased when it came to my attention three wecks ago that
my parking space in front of my home maybc taken away. My issues are as follows:
· How did this happen
· I realize the student population is growing
· The residents should not be penalized
I supported the school bonds in good faith
There needs to be an alternative that will work for all, such as:
· New zoning for the schools dislricts
· Students parking at Blackb;.y Fr,,m
· Busing
· I am sure there are many additional ideas
I will be one of many attending the City Council meeting, June 18th,
and I appreciate your rethlnki.g the parki-$ issue.
Regards,
Lynett Wells
8165 Presidio Drive
Cupertino, Ca 95014
Work #: 408.747.1100 x 113
Home #: 408.257.1992
homer_tong~fuhsd.org
City Hall
~ 10300 Tone Avenue
C]TY OF Cupertino, CA 95014-3255
(408) 777-3354
CUPEILTINO FA× (408)777-3333
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
Summary
AGENDA ITEM ~1 AGENDA DATE June 18, 2001
SUBJECT AND ISSUE
Consideration of Petition for Permit Parking on Imperial Avenue between McClellan
Road and Alcazar Avenue (8:00 AM to 3:30 PM Monday through Friday)
BACKGROUND
On June 4, 2001 the Council considered a request and petition from the residents of
Imperial Avenue requesting permit parking Monday through Friday between 8:00 AM
and 3:30 PM from McClellan Road to Alcazar Avenue. In noting that the Monta Vista
Student Parking program would be heard on June 18, 2001, the Council deferred action
on the Imperial Avenue Petition since it is related to the Monta Vista parking issue.
Residents on Imperial have raised concerns regarding congestion and blocked driveways
during school hours when parents of the Lincoln Elcaientary School children are
dropping off, picking up or othen,,4se attending achool events. It is not clear whether this
problem persists during the day or even every day. More importantly and of greater
concern to the residents, there are a number of (apparently) high school students who are
parking on Imperial during the day. There currently is no student parking pilot program in
effect since there is no preferential parking on this street. However residents note that
adjacent neighborhoods currently enjoy preferential parking restrictions and, for similar
reasons are asking the City to provide permit perking during the same hours (8:00 AM to
3:30 PM Monday-Friday) as the other streets in the vicinity.
Because the petition had been received properly under the existing guidelines staff had
recommended approval of preferential parking for Imperial Avenue between McCellan
Road and AlcnT,~r Avenue on June 4, 2001 for the reasons noted.
Staff, at Council request, has monitored the conditions on Imperial Avenue north of'
McClellan and notes that most parking is, as would be expected, concentrated at the south
end of the street closest to the school. Staff (Code Enforcement and Public Works) did
not observe at any time a condition where all available parking on the street was taken.
However, there does appear to be a significant increase in the use of curbside parking
spaces, again, not surprisingly, during the hours that Monta Vista High School is in
session.
Becanse of the conditions noted above and to provide equity amongst the neighborhoods,
(Imperial is the only street proximate to Monta Vista that does not now enjoy preferential
parking) staff is recommending approval of the petition from the Imperial Avenue
residents.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Adoption of Resolution No. 01- ~ designating Parking on Imperial Avenue
between Alc~Tsr Avenue and McClellan Road Monday through Friday from 8:00AM to
3:30 PM
Submitted by: Approved for submission:
Ralph A. Quails, Jr. David W. Knapp
Director of.Public Works City Manager
RESOLLrrlON NO. 01-141
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO
DESIGNATING PREFERENTIAL PARKING ON IMPERIAL AVENUE
B~TWEEN ALCA~-M~. AVENU~ AND MCCLELLAN ROAD
WHEREAS, Ord/nance No. 1197 of the City of Cupertino ordains that a preferential parldng
zone be established in Cupertino in which parking will be prohibited on streets as designated by
resolution of the City Council; and
WHEREAS, exemption to such prohibition shall be by parklnE permit as established in said
Ordinance.
NOW, THERF~ORE, BE IT RESOLVED that said parking prohibition shall apply
Monday through Friday between the hours of S:00 a.m. and 3:30 p.m. while school is in session.
Street Name Side Limits
Imperial Avenue Both Between Alcazar Avenue
and McClellan Road
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meet~n~ of the City Council of the City of Cupertino
this __ day of June, 2001 by the following vote:
Vote Members of the City Council
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST: APPROVED:
City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupertino
.~ City of Cupertino
10300 Torte Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014
(408) 777-3308
CI~Y OJ: FAX (4011) 777-3333
CU PER!INO Coznmunity Development Department
SUMMARY
Agenda Item No. :~.,~2.~ Agenda Date: June lg, 2001
PRESENTATION OF A DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION
INFORMATIONAL ITEM
This is an information~! item to introduce a si~ificant development application located on the
former McDonald-Dorsa quarry property. The aoolication is incomvlete since the
environmental impact report has not been completed and this item was not scheduled or noticed
as a Public Hearing. Consequently, no action or decision can be made at t_bis time. This item
was originally scheduled for a City Council Study Session, but recent study session agendas have
been full. For that reason, staffschcduled this item as a New Business itcm for a City Council
meeting.
This item provides an opportunity for the City Council and residents who have become aware of
the application to provide early input or comments to the applicant. Several e-mail'comments
have been received from residents and are attached for the Council's information.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council receive the project introduction from the applicant,
discuss the pwject issues and provide appropriate direction to the applicant regarding thc
application.' Since this is not an advertised public hearing on the application no action or
decision can be made at this time.
Appficafion No.(s): 04-Z-01, 03-U-01, 01-DA-01, 04-EA-01
Property Owner: Canyon Heights Academy, LLC
Property Location: Southeast side of Stevens Canyon Road, approximately 100 feet southerly
of Ricardo Road, a 124 gross acre hillside property bounded by Stevens
Canyon Road to thc northwest, Deep Cliff Golf Course to the north, Linda
Vista Park to the noflheast and Stevens Creek Park to the south (formerly
McDonald-Dom q-*~ry).
Project Description: The applicant is seeking rezoning and a use permit to allow thc
construction of a 240,000 square foot private school accommodating up to
1,500 students ranging from preschool through 12~ grade, open space and
one single-family residence. The school is projected to have 84 staff
Canyon Heights Academy
June 18, 2001
Page 2
BACKGROUND:
The applicant proposes to construct a 240,000 sq. fL private school on a 124-acre hillside
property. The subject site is zoned RI-IS (Residential I-lillside) and is in thc Foothill 5-20 Acre
Very Low Density land usc designation. Thc site is located in the Urban Service Area of the
City. The General Plan intended for this site to be developed with 12-14 residential units.
Canyon Heights Academy, a private school, intends on occupying the proposed site. Thc school
is temporarily located at Whisman School in Mountain View. The school opened in September
2000. The applicant hopes to ~'ansfer the school operation to the subject site for the 2003-2004
school year starting in September 2003. In order to meet that deadline, the applicant wishes to
phase development on the site. The architectural drawings in the attached plan set reflect part of
first phase of the project.
Quasi-Public Uses
General Plan Policy 2-80 allows public and q~n-~i-public activities to be located within any land
use designation upon zoning review approval to ensure compatibility with the surrounding
neighborhood and to ensure that the slreet and utility system has the capacity for the
development.
DISCUSSION:
An Environmental Impact Report is being px~'~ed that will include analysis of project impacts
including analysis of the compatibility of this project with the surrounding single-family
residences in the Foothill 5-20 Acre Very Low Density designation as well as the capacity of the
street and utility system to support this project.
David Powers and Associates was selected to pr~are the Environmental Impact Report. The
Administrative Draft of the EIR will be complete in late September 2001, with the Final EIR
following in Febvm~y 2002. The first Planning Commission is pwjected to be March 2002, with
the City Council hearing to follow in April 2002. Attached is a tentative schedule that was part
of the request for proposal for the EIR.
Staff has identified the following as potentially significant environmental impa?ts to be analyzed
in the EIR:
Damage to scenic resources inclu&ing native oak trees and the riparian corridor flora and
fauna along Stevens Creek.
Degradation of existing vi~ml character.
· Degradation to thc air quality in the area duc to increased auto traffic.
Exposure of si?ificant ~/~actures to adverse geologic effects.
· Interference with groundwater recharge in the area.
, Exposure of people and structures to si~omi6cant risks involving flooding or dam failure
· Conflict with laud use policies in the General Plan.
· Exposure of neighboring residents to excessive noise levels, including an increase in thc
ambient noise levels in the project vicinity.
2
Canyon Heights Academy
June 18, 2001
Page 3
· Degradation of public services including fire and police, resulting in inadequate
emergency access.
· Substantial increase in traffic in relation to the existing traffic load and street capacity.
· Increase storm water runoff requiring the construction of new drainage facilities that
could cause si~ynificant im!~lcts.
Pe.mit Process
~te rezonlng (04-Z-01) will specify the boundaries of the BQ (Qussi-Public), OS (Open Space)
and RHS (Residential Hillside) zones. Following the anactment of thc rczoning, thc applicant
intends to file a lot line adjustment to sl~ existing property lines to match the rezoning exhibit.
'l~te initial Use permit (03-U-01) will include the site plan for the entire projcct~ with
architectural details for the buildings proposed in Phase One. General mass and bulk diagrams
for thc buildings in Phase Two will bc provided, with thc architectural style to match the Phase
One buildings.
The contents of the Development Agreement (01-DA-01) have not been detea-~ned.
Phase Two
Once the applicant finalizes the details for Phase Two, the applicant will go through a new Use
Permit review for the new buildings, based on the Phase One conceptual drawings and the
Development Agreement.
Single Family Residence
The applicant intends to rese/*ve a portion of the 124-acre site for a private residence that will
take access offofLinda Vista Road. The residence will be in the RHS (Residential Hillside)
zoning district, and will be developed in accordance with the hillside regulations in the
Municipal Code.
Other
The applicant has been working with the Public Works Department to address the possible road
alignments of Stevens Canyon Road at the entrance to the subject property.
The applicant has been working with the Parks and Recreation Department to determine the
appropriate path through the subject site for a public trail connecting Stevens Creek Park to
McClellan Road.
Staff asked the applicant to explore a potential traffic mitigation measure that create of a "haul
wad" connecting Stevens Creek Quant (Voss) to Stevens Creek Boulevard near the Hanson
Permanente Quarry. The'purpose of this haul road would be to remove truck traffic from
Stevens Canyon Road, thereby reducing the net increase in traffic generated by the school
project. The haul road itself would raise a number of environmental issues and concerns, which
would require further evaluation. The applicant chose not to further pursue the haul road at this
time, and it is not being evaluated in the Rill.
Canyon Heights Academy
June 18, 2001
Page 4
Enclosures:
Ten,alive Project Schedule
Written Communicalions from Public
Plan Set
Prepared by: Peter Gilli, Associate Planner
Submi~ed by: Approved by:
Dave Knapp
Director of Comm-~ity Development City
G:planning:pdmport:cc
EXHIBIT E
TENTATIVE PROJECT SCHEDULE
RFP's sent out April 6, 2001 ~
Proposals due from Consultants May 11,2001
Select Consultant May 29, 2001
Finalize Contract, receive deposit from applicant Late May 2001
City Council Introduction June 18, 2001
Neighborhood Meeting Late June, 2001
Scoping Meeting Early July, 2001
Environmental Review Committee Hearing July 11, 2001
ADEIR submitted to staff September 21,2001
Staff returns ADEIR comments to consultant October 5, 2001
Draft EIR submitted by consultant October 25, 2001
Begin 45 day review period on DEIR October 26, 2001
End of 45 day review period December 9, 2001
Submit comments received on DEIR to consultant December 10, 2001
Receive Administrative Final EIR January 7, 2002
Staff returns comments on AFEIR January 21, 2002
Receive Final EIR from Consultant Februaq( 18, 2002
Planning Commission public hearing (1) March 13, 2002
Planning Commission public hearing (2) March 27, 2002
City Council public hearing (1) April 17, 2002
City Council public hearing (2) (first reading) May 8, 2002
City Council public hearing (3) (second reading) May 22, 2002
Rev/sc~ May $0, ?001
..... Original Message .....
From: Greg Laffen [mailto:greg@omcal.com]
Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2001 12:11 PM
To: davek@cupertino.org
Subject: PERSONA~ CONCERN. STEVENS CANYON PROJECT
Dear Don,
My name is Greg Laffen I am a single father of four sons living at
11103 canyon vista drive Cupertino I also own and operate a business in
Cupertino called Cal marketing dba Office Master seating at 21730
Stevens creek blvd %101 cupertino. Ire operated my business in Cupertino
for over 10 years I~ve enjoyed the community so much that I decided to
buy a home in Cupertino June of 1999.We love living in Cupertino. I
recently heard of the proposed canyon heights school and found out that
my house is close to the proposed project. At first I thought the
school might be a good option for the boys school as I had one of the
older boys at valley Christian when we lived in San Jose. Unlike
Cupertino public schools San Jose has some problems so our need for an
option in Cupertino is not needed.
My greatest concern of the project is traffic safety my boys currently
bike the area and I am very concerned over additional cars coming up
the canyon even if traffic lights are installed this is potentially a ..
formula for problems, even a couple hundred more cars a day coming up
the canyon could create safety problems way beyond what already exists
in the area.
Last weekend.a survey engineer was in my back yard area placing
boundary markers for the proposed project. I asked him candidly what he
thought of the project he said it will create many problems for the
area and in his opinion the land was not meant to handle something like
this but money talks and I~ve heard this guy has a lot to throw around'
quote.
My main concern remains safety for mine and other f~milies I truly
hope the board takes a good look before considering rezoning this
property. My other concern is the overall burden the project will
create for Cupertino residents traffic, noise, property values, hidden
expenses to the city and more. The traffic issue alone is going to be a
problem, a personal observation is that the .canyon road is just about
maxed out on what it can handle on cars and what appears to be
happening is that many home owners in the Saratoga LG area are starting
to use the road as an alternative to De A nza blvd to cut over to 280
and 85.If this alone catches on to other residents even to say 100 more
cars twice a day this alone will. have a major impact on traffic flow
and saftey.
· Thankyou for allowing me to express my concern. Regards GREG LA,FEN.
D,,vid Kn,,pp
From: John Trolln~n rlohnt~dinanbmw.com]
~nt: Wednesday, June 13, 2001 10:03 AM
fo: David Knapp; Don Bumett; Michael Chang; Richard Lowenthal; Sandra L James
Subject: Canyon Heights C~nyon
My name is John Trollman. My wife and I have been a resident of Cupertino
since 2/81, and I was born and raised in California (raised in Menlo Park
and Palo Alto). We live off Foothill Blvd, at 10255 Anthony Place. I am
delighted with the prospect of the Canyon Heights Academy moving into
Cupertino, off Stevens Canyon Road. I regularly Jog up to the Stevens Creek
Dam, and love the area. The School seems like a wonderful, non-invasive use
of the land end, in my mind, far superior to a few more luxury homes
sprawling over the landscape. I sincerely hope that you are able to work
out a suitable arrangement to install the school in the proposed tract
behind the Deep Creek Golfcourse and adjacent to the Stevens Canyon Road and
the Stevens Creek Park.
Sincerely,
John Trollman
John R. McDonough
John J. McDonough
11022 Canyon Vista Drive
Cupertino CA 95014
(408) S63-0434
JohnMcDonough(~ms~ corn
June 11, 2001
David Knapp, City Manager
city mn
10300 Tone Ave
Cupertino CA 95014
We are residents of Cupertino, living in Ra,~¢ho Dc~-'p Cliff, off Stevens Canyon Road. '
We write to express our great concern about the proposal of Canyon Heights Academy to
build a K- 12 private school adjacent to this community.
One of our principal concerns is with traffic congestion and safety. It is clear that if the
proposed school is con, hutted, there will be extremely heavy traffic on Stevens Canyon
Road at least twice a day, when children are transported to and from school, in addition to
the normally heavy automobile and truck lraffic on that two-lane commy road. Long,
crawling lines of vehicles, frequent stops, and excessive exhaust fumes are inevitable.
We are also concerned about the substantial noise which such a school will bring to this
peaceful area, not only during various periods in the school day (e.g., recesses), but also
during athletic events and other special occasions.
In addition, we are concerned about the potential environmental asmage to the ama
which this massive proposed cormh aclion project is likely to cause. Very careful inquiry
should be made as to whether there are any endangered species in the impacted area that
Finally, we believe that searching investigation should be made into the long-range
economic viability of what surely will be a high-tuition and otherwise expensive
educational enierprise.
In our opinion, the current low density zoning of this area under the City's l~neral plan
should be continued. It has served the City well in the past and will continue to do so in
the future. Please preserve one of the pleasantest resi~ venues in the Bay Area (or
anywhere else) by declining to approve the proposed new school.
Very truly yours,
J~l~ai~. Mci nollgh , ~J
Richard A. Blaine
22284 N De An~ Circle
Cupeflino, CA 95014
June 11, 2001
Honorable Mayor, Sandm L. Jan~s
10300 Torte Ave.
Cupertino, CA 95014
Subject: Canyon Heights Ac~_a~_,~uy
I undeFstm~ that there is a proposal to build a private school with some 1500 su,d~_tm~s plus staff on Stevens
Canyon Road b~w~m Ricardo Road and the entr~n~ to Stev~s Creek Park.
I live just off of Stev~s Canyon road betwean Mc Clellan and the proposed site for the Canyon Heights
Academy. I am a long term Cupertino reside~ past member and chairpermn of the Cupertino Ped~u~an
and Bicycle Commi~__~ and recipient of the CREST award in 1995. I am concam~ about how this
I use Stev~ Canyon Rond almost ov~y day. I walk to tbe Storms Cr~k Dam, m the Dc~ Clit~ C~off .
Cour~ and bicycle three times a w~k alon~ St~-~ms Canyon/Fooltgll. As you may know, Foo~hill/Stemms
Canyon road is a major bicycle route to Saratnga over McClellan and/or Mt. Eden road. There are both
bicycle commuters and rocr~atiooal bicyclists using this mad stwm days a week.
Since the A_~__a__.vay is not a local school, I ~xpect little or no car pooling resulting in some 1500 or more
cars in the momhlg and 1500 cars in the ~ picidn~ up students and makin~ tums across the track
traffic from Stevems Cr~lc Quarry. Not only will this cause a highly asn~o~s situation for students,
walkers, tracks, cars and bicyclists but this will cause monumental trsm¢ jams at every intersection on
Foothill Blvd/Steve~s Canyon Road from I280 past the Academy all the way m Sar~_toga over Mt. Eden
road. The intersections of Sti,w~s Creek Blvd. and Mc Clellan Road with Foothill Blvd. will becom~
intolerable as will the level of triSinc alo~ the ~ length of Foothill/Stevems Canyon _ro~,t,
Widenln~ Stevens Canyon Road and South Foothil! Blvd. to four lanes will not ~solve the tr~mc problem.
Judging by the traffic jam on McClellan Road past Lincoln Elem~tary School and Monte Vista High
School, even 500 foot left turn ~ (lhat is enough for only 25 cats) in front of the propol~ academy
driveway will not be su~icieut.
This proposed ,~a_~ny will provide no bereft ~o the ci~,~* of Cupertino. What it will do is cr~te a
highly dangerous sim~tlon arxxanpanied by major trst~i¢ jams.
Please reject thls proposal now and save all of us time, eaergy and tax pay~s moncy.
Sincerely,
Vico-Mayor Richard ~
Coonoil M~nl~r Don B~
Council M~nber Michael Chang
Cit~ ~, David K~p
David Knapp
From: Marjorie Sun [marjorieeun~yahoo.com]
Sent: Wednesday, Juno 13, 2001 1:43 PM
To: davekQcupertino.org; sjamesQcupertino.org; rtowenthal~cupertino.org;
mchang~cupertino.org
Subject: Deeply concern about the Stevens Canyon Road private school site
June 13, 2001
Dear City Council Members and the City Manager,
I am deeply concerned about the proposed private
school site at Stevens Canyon Road. Traffic
congestion and traffic safety are my utmost
concern.
I live on Merriman Road and I use Foothill
Boulevard every day. With the combination of
increasing commuter traffic and gravel trucks
traveling to and fro~ the quarry, I feel that
Foothill Boulevard and Stevens Canyon Road are
already overburdened. We do not need more
traffic on these roads. Furthermore, I feel that
the addition of this private school does not add
''any benefits to Cupertino residents and property
owners. I choose to live in Cupertino because of
its great public school system.
As elected public officials, I expect you to do
what is right for Cupertino and its residents.
Regards,
Siu Sun
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
Page ! of !
David Knapp
From: Julia Moncton Dmoncton~ihome.com]
Sent: Wednesday. June 13, 2001 1:44 PM
To: sjamesQcupertino.org; rlowanth_alQcup, ertino.org; dbumett~cupertino.o~g;
mchang~}cupertino.org; davaK~cupar,no.org
Subject: Canyon Heights Academy
Hi.
My name is Julia Moncton and I live on Avenida Lan. e. whi.ch _~_.off Foothill Bivd./r~..ity received · .f~e.r .
about a proposed new private school that would .be ;ocatea o~ umvens ~any. on ~oan.. t a.m.concem..o~_ a..eauz
the additional traffic load that such a large SChOOl would Impo~. e on.our str.~.., vy.e mm.aw nave .a. am~ .cu~t
time turning onto Foothill during the morning commute .espe~ally w~. en_scn.oo! ? ~_n. ses. s~.on.. ~ can~..sea n.ow
this already congested strea~ would be able to handle ma additionm ;ramc.ma.t 1,ouu s.m. ea. nts w_ou~a require.
Unlike ourlocal public schools, very few students, if any, would walk to s. cnoo, .or take. me ;)us. ?.u.r .
neighborhood school, Stevens Creek Elementary, has only 600+ students and nas a ~arge popu~aaon oT
students that walk or receive bus service, and It STILL suffers from traffic problems. Please take into
consideration the concerns of people who use Foothill for their regular commute In your evaluation of this
proposal.
Thanks for giving me the opporlunity to voice my concemsl
Julia Moncton
J2mon~on~home.com
53-5758
6/13/01 "
David Knapp
From: Sarah Jewell [sajQitsa.ucsf.edu]
Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2001 12:06 PM
To: rlowenthalQ~upertino.org; dbumett~cupe~no.org; mchang@cupertino.o~g;
davek~lcupertino.org
Dear City Council Members=
As a resident of the Foothill/McClellan area of Cupertino for the past 13
years, I was shocked to hear of the proposal to build a private school for
1500 students up the road from our home.
Our neighborhood is already besieged by the traffic congestion, road
hazards, noise and carcinogenic exhaust from the convoys of gravel trucks
travelling through it. The beauty and recreational opportunities at
Stevens Creek Park are already impaired by this traffic. The additional
burden of noise,traffic and pollutiqn imposed by a school would be
intolerable.
The area under question should retain a low-density residential zoning
designation. Please reject this proposal definitively !
Sincerely,
Sarah Jewell
22540 Kinst Court
David Knapp
~From: Amy Leung [ayleung~lyahoo.com]
tent: Wednesday, June 13, 2001 1:02 AM _ . _
~'o: (lavekl~lcupertino.org; sjames~l~upertino.org; nowenmal~cupertino.org;
dbumett~icupertino.org; mchangQcupertino.org ..
Subject: Deeply concern about the Stevens Canyon Road private schoo
June 13, 2001
Dear City Council Members and the City Manager,
I am deeply concerned about the proposed private
school site at Stevens Canyon Road. Traffic
congestion and traffic safety are my utmost concern.
I live at 10605 Merriman Road and I use Foothill
Boulevard every day. With the combination of
increasing com~uter traffic and gravel trucks
traveling to and from the quarry, I feel that Foothill
Boulevard and Stevens Canyon Road are already
overburdened. We do not need more traffic on these
roads. Furthermore, I feel that the addition of this
private school does not add any benefits to Cupertino
residents and property owners. I choose to live in
Cupertino because of its great public school system.
As elected public officials, I expect you to do what
is right for Cupertino and its residents.
Regards,
~'~y Leung
Do You Yahool?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
a year! http=//personal.mail.yahoo.com/
David Knapp
From: BobGIdstnQaol.com '
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2001 9:44 PM ..
To: sjamesQcupertino.org; rlowen~al~cupertino.org; dbumett~cupertino.org;
mchang~cupertino.org; davek~lcupertino.org
Subject: Canyon heights A~ademy
I am writing to express disapproval of the proposed siting in Cupertino
of the Canyon Heights Academy.
I believe that changing the residential zoning of the parcel in question,
is a betrayal of the trust that residents have placed in the city
government to maintain the zonings that protect the residential
environment. For families that have settled here based upon such
zonings, it is unjust to change them without an overriding public
interest.
The proposed development will add traffic, pollution, noise, and
congestion to my environment, and I cannot see any public good that comes
from my consequent discomfort.
Bob Goldstein 408/253-4489
22483 McClellan Road
Cupertino, CA 95014-2767
bobgldstn@aol.com
David Knapp
From: Paul Copeland [paul_copeland~yahoo.com]
~ent: Tuesday, June 12, 2001 7:43 PM
fo: sjames~cupertino.org; rlowenthal~cupertino.org; dbumett~cupertino.org;
mcheng~icupertlno.org; davekQcupertino.org
Subject: Private school proposed for Stevens C, anyan Road
I would like to express my strong opposit£on to the
proposed Stevens Canyon Road location for the Canyon
Heights Academy. My concerns are traffic congestion,
traffic safety, and the cost of Dublic services for
which the city would receive no property taxes from
this tax-exempt institution.
As a resident of the Monte Vista neighborhood, I can
tell you that Foothill Blvd. is already overcrowded
with large trucks and the traffic from those of us who
live in the neighborhood. Adding a large school with
its daily automobile traffic will only add to the
congestion and decrease the safety of our neighborhood
streets.
Paul Copeland
· 10186 C;m~erley Lane
Cupertino, CA 95014
253-4821
Do You Yahoo!?
.__Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
David Knapp
From: David Marcus [davmarcusQhome.com]
Sent: Tuesday_, June 12, 2001 3:04 PM
To: sjames~upertino.org
Cc: rlownlhal~icupertino.org; dbumettC~cupertion.org; mchang~cupertino.org;
davel~cupertino.org
Subject: Canyon Heights Academy
I am a resident in the Stevens Canyon Road area. I have recently
become aware of =he proposal to locate the Canyon Heights Academy
priva=e school in my area.
I wish to register my objection to this proposal because of the
increased traffic congestion and traffic hazards that would result.
There will also be increased noise in what is now a quiet
neighborhood.
I am also concerned that this school will pay no 9roperty taxes and
will require Cupertino municipal services that would be better used
elsewhere.
Thank you for your attention.
David Marcus
David Knapp
~ From: Steve Swen [swenQapple.com]
· ~ent: Tuesday, June 12, 2001 11:08 AM
I'o: sjamest~cupertino.oq]; rlowenthalQcu.p, ertlno.org; dbumett~upertino.org;
mchang~lcupertino.o~g; davek~icupertino~o~g
Subject: New Private School Proposed off Stevens canyon
Dear Council Members,
I'm writing you to express our concerns of the proposed private school
off Stevens Canyon road. It does not bring in additional revenue to the
city, increase traffic, and reduce the open space that is so precious
these days.
Stevens Canyon road is designed for low traffic volume. With the big
trucks carrying sand and rocks plus people commute using highway 9, the
traffic is bad enough already. There are a lot of people biking on the
narrow windy road as well. Then there are the local residents and people
going to the parks and trails in this area also competing for the road.
We have to set priorities on what are important to our city and
neighborhoods. Adding large school and take away open space while
increasing traffic does not seem like a good use of our l~m{ted resources.
Thanks,
Steve Swen
Ning Tang
.__22395 St. Andrews Ave.
~upertino, CA 95014
{408)255-2702
1
I
David Knapp
From: JBPaull Oexclte.com
Sent: Sunda~, June 10, 2001 4:44 PM
To: davekOcupertino.org
Subject: Proposed 1500 student School on Stevens Canyon Road
C%ty Manager Knapp:
I was made aware of this proposal just today and it makes no sense
considering the added traffic congestion problems (among other problems)this
would create.
For starters, I suggest some of the council members including yourself cone
out weekdays between 7:30A.M. and 9:00/10:00A.M. and look at the traffic
flow between So. Foothill at Rt.280 and Stevens Canyon Road. Then consider
what it would be like when traffic carrying 1500 students is added. Also
look at traffic exiting 280 from the East to So. Foothill and exiting So.
Foothill going East on 280.
Sincerely,
John (Jack)Paul
22421 Carnoustie Ct.
Cupertino, 95014
Send a cool gift with your E-Card
http://www.bluemountain.com/giftcenter/
David Knapp
~From: Hamer Jilllan[Hamer. Jillian~BCG.corn]
;ent: Wednesday, June 13, 2001 4:03 PM
,'o: 'davek~cuperUno.org'
Subject: Proposed Canyon Heights SchOOl
Dear ~r. Knapp,
My family and I have been very alarmed to learn about the proposed private
school in Stevens Canyon.
Imagine 2,000-3,500 additional cars every day on Foothill, S~even's Canyon,
the top of Steven's Creek, and probably McClellan, Bubb and Stelling as
well! Many of us will have difficulty getting out of our neighborhoods.
This is a terrible time to take a potential 10-15 upscale homes out of the
city's tax base and insert the service costs of an enormous non-profit
institution.
The creek area near the Stevens Creek Park is a lovely wilderness. It would
be too bad to enclose this whole space and make it inaccessible to people
not connected with =he school.
Please help us oppose the school.
Thank you for your time and concern.
Sincerely,
Jillian Hamer
~10310 Lockwood Drive
~irec~ telephone 408 257-0579
£ax 408 257-3959
Mobile 408 981-9040
David Knapp
From: JT9 LoarrotQorimp.com]
Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2001 1:40 PM
To: planningQcupertino.org; davek~cupertino.org; mchange~cupertino.org;
dbumett~cupertino.org; rlowenb~al~cupertino.org; sjamesQcupertino.org
Subject: Canyon Heights Academy proposal for Stevens Canyon site
To: Members of the City Council of Cupertino, CA
David Knapp, City Manager, Cupertino, CA
Planning Department, Cupertino, CA
From: Jan Stoeckenius
Julia Tien
22386 Cupertino Road
tel/fax: 408 996 2064
Date: 6/14/01
subj: Canyon Heights Academy proposal for Stevens Canyon site
We are writing in regard to the proposed development by the Canyon
Heights Academy in the area adjacent to Stevens Creek Park. We
understand there will be a presentation made to the Cupertino City
Council concerning this proposal on June 18th, but will not be able to
attend due to a prior commitment.
We have no objection in principle to private schools being located in
Cupertino, even if these primarily serve students from other
communities. We also do not question that Canyon Heights Academy would
strive to be a good neighbor and member of the community. We feel,
however, that this specific development is not appropriate for the
proposed site, for several reasons:
a. The proposed size (1500 students plus staff) is in excess of what
can be supported by existing roadways.
This is a large site, but has limited road access. South Foothill
Blvd./Stevens Canyon Road provides only one lane in each
direction. Essentially all access would be from the same
direction.
The nearest "high capacity" road (at the intersection of Stevens
Creek Blvd. and Foothill Blvd.) is about a mile away, and is
already heavily congested during the morning commute.
The topography of the lot and the nature of the surrounding
development makes provision of another access route difficult.
Even if the school served only boarding students {not practical
for such a large establishment), staff and required service traffic
would be far more than if this parcel were developed as currently
zoned. We live across the street from the Sunny View senior care
facility, a much smaller operation with about 300 residents, none
of whom commute. Traffic generated by the facility, and the
associated noise, is enough to be bothersome at times.
Safety during special events at the school is also a potential
problem area. During events such as graduation, it may be
impossible to provide timely fire, police, or ;mhulance service
to the school or surrounding neighborhoods due to traffic
congestion. We have witnessed an example of this elsewhere,
but luckily, no life-threatening emergencies occurred during '.
that instance.
b. Compatibility with the surrounding conuuunit¥
In terms of population density, the proposed development is roughly
equivalent to developing the entire site using R1-7.5 zoning (if this
were possible given the topography). This is a much higher density than
the surrounding areas, with the exception of a small n~nber of lots
along Ricardo Road. The proposal would bring relatively high density
development directly to the boundary of Stevens Creek Park.
In contrast, the existing zoning protects the park with a
low-density buffer zone.
c. Compensation for provision of urban serivces
Because Canyon Heights Academy is a tax exempt religious organization,
it is not.clear to us that the school would pay sufficient taxes and
fees to compensate the City for the cost of providing urban services to
the site.
As noted above, the proposed population density is approximately
the same as if the site was developed with R1-7.5 zoning. Under
this hypothetical zoning, the site could hold about 425
homes. Given current housing prices, this number of new homes
would generate over $3 million annually in property tax, a portion
of which would fund urban services provided by the city. Would
the proposed school provide comparable compensation?
In comparison, development under the existing iow-density zoning
would generate much less revenue, but would also require fewer
services due to the smaller added population (approximately 24
homes with perhaps 100-125 residents total).
We also do not expect this project to provide much in the way of
indirect benefits to the City. A large majority of the student
population is likely to come from outside the community, and we
anticipate few of the faculty/staff members would live
locally. There are no businesses adjacent to the property that
might be patronized by individuals associated with the school
(e.g. a 7-Eleven or Starbucks), and we certainly wodld not
encourage development of such.
Due to the isolated location, there is no reason to expect the
school to favor Cupertino businesses in its own transactions.
We thus expect the indirect economic benefits of the school to be
much less than those of a residential development of comparable
density.
This location is one of the few remaining rural areas of the city and we
encourage the city to preserve its character by retaining the current,
very iow density residential zoning of the parcel.
Sincerely,
Jan Stoeckenius and Julia Tien
David Knapp
'From: Ahmed Dwidar [ahd~}cypr~ss.com]
Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2001 12:34 PM
To: devekOcupertino.o~
Cc: Ahmed Dwidar
Subject: Proposed private school at Stevens Canyon road.
City Mgr Mr. Knapp,
I'm resident of Cupertion city. I would like to express my concerns about the proposed
private school at Stevens Canyon road. I believe it will have signilieant negative impacts not
only on the neighborhood but also on the residents of Cupertion city. I urge you to vote
a~ainst it.
Ahmed Dwidar.
No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No.
6/]4/0]
Page I Ol !
David Knapp
From: MARTHA LLOYD [bmlloydQflash.net]
8ant: Thursday, June t4, 2001 12:5t PM
flowenthal~cupertino.org; dbumett~cupertino.org;
To: sjames~cupertino.org; . ._ .
mchang~cupertino.org; eavelffg~cupenino.org
Subject: Proposed pr'~'ate school on Stevens Canyon Road
To all membem of our Cupertino City Council:
P,e.e. p,.es.- .o. .NO. .NO.. .O to_tbs
between Ricerdo Roao ana h'm. evens c;reeK P, arK ,n m..e u.u. pem.no ~oo~,.s..,~_f,,.~.~ .,-. ,~,. ;'.I";'.¥ 'I__~"~._'~'._'L'_"J
arealllll I was raised on McClellan Road and have Irve~ nere ,n my parents nome since lt~r, anQ wau~.n
this lovely area become a massNe mess of too many monstrous homes, duplexes, apa, i,.ents, gravel pits, too
much heavy truck traffic, etc. sic..e~..Now .they ~i.nk they.should build a scho?.l up here that we taxpayers
weald have to subsidize and then na~..e ~o p. ut up w~.ln more.,'amc,.m .o..re_c?ngesao. n, mom. un~ ae~lmssa~_h a
vehicles, people, etcllll Let th. em bu,ld ~e~.r scn. o~..?o..mewne~ elcel, I~lee.s.e, p. leas.e, o..o. not e?.mv
venture to happen in what'.s lan of the on .~..:.no oui~a~ng area ot our communay, we aon~ nave ~o nave
buildings on avery piece ot vacant grouna,, .
What part of NO do we need to explain furtherlll
Sincerely,
Martha L. Lloyd
22381 McClellan Road
Cupertino, 95014
408/252-0469
bmlloyd~flash.net
6/14/01
ORDINANCE NO. 1881
AN ORDrNANC~ OF THE crrY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO AMENDING
CHAPTER 2.16 OF THE CUPERTINO MUNICIPAL CODE, CITY COUNCIL - SALARIES
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO ORDAINS that Chapter
2.16 of the Cupertino Municipal Code is amended to read as follows:
2.16.10 Statutory basis.
Section 36516 of the Government Code of the State authorizes the City Council to
enact an ordinance providing that each member of the City Council receive a salary in
accordance with a schedule set forth in said section.
2.16.20 Amount of salary - Effective date.
A. Each member of the City Council shall receive a salary of five hundred sixty-two '
dollars and fifty-nine c2mts ($562.59) per month, or fraction thereof.
]3. Upon beginning a now term of o~¢e for a Couneilmember, the Council shall
receive a salary of six hundred eighteen dollars and eighty-five cents ($618.85)
per month, or fraction thereof.
2.16.30 Reimbursement.
The salaries proscribed herein are and shall be exclusive of any amounts payable to
each member of the Council as reimbursement for actual and necessary expenses incurred by
him/her in the perfo~,-,~nce of official duties for the City.
INTRODUCED at a regular meeting of the City Coon¢il of the City of Cupertino this
~ day of ,2001, and ENACTED at a regular mooting of the City Council
of the City of Cupmino this day of ,2001, by the following vote:
VOTE ME2VlB~ OF ~ CITY COUNCIL
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST: APPROVED:
._ City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupertino
Editor
Cupertino Courier
Dear Sir.
l~hile ! found the lead sto~ on the co-operation of the ciL~ with the business owners,
& the developert (June 13th issue), interestiust the priority siren this, over the
hearings on the Canyq~ Hetshta Academy, 1naves me concerned about your priorities.
The prime concern, by survey of the seneral population, is traffic. Yet this devel-
opueut can only exacerbate an already 8eriotm situation on Stevens Canyon Rd., due
to the trucks.
The only access to this site is on a blind curve. This al,vel,pm,at would pour hundreds
of vehicles, many driven by teenaBere, onto a road presently carryin$ up to 350 trucks
an heur, plus many cars from It, ut,bells Rd., Saratosa, and beyond. ~td recreation,
and heavy bicycle traffic, and you have a predictable receipe for disaster.
This doesn't touch on the impact on the present neighbors. Some of whom are 2nd gen-
eration residents. Doesn*t address the impact on down stream residents, at least as
far. as Stevens Creek Blvd. Do,suet concider whether a 8ch, al sheuld be situated
below a dame with a kv~u earthguake £ault under it. Do,snOt mention the impact this
would have on the proposed creekside trail.
This, & more cannot be explored here~ due to space limitations. Yet this only rated
3*' bottom of pas, 10.
What Chinking created the priority relegatin~ so important an issue to the conmunity
to a footnote,' while elevatins storage space to the lead front pa~e article? Does
h, mn interest superceed c,-.-~unity beat interest?
I am pleased for the business owners, but come
Memorandum
Date: May 31, 2001
To: Dave Knapp
City Manager
From: Charles K. Kilian
City Attorney
Re: Proposed Ground Lease for Skate Park
(Compaq Computer Corporation)
[Privileged & Confidential]
As you are aware, attorneys for Compaq Computer Corporation have submitted to the
City, in response to the City's proposed Lease With Option to Purchase, a
substantially different lease proposal, a copy of which has already been provided to
you.
This memorandum is intended to provide to you, and ultimately to the City Council, a
summary of this new proposal.
Background
Originally, there were discussions between the City and Compaq which tentatively
conternplated that Compaq would dedicate the site to the City for a skate park. The
property to be dedicated appeared to have no active use contemplated by Compaq. At
the time of the initial discussion, it was unknown as to when Compaq would be
submitting its plans for the City's consideration.
As talks progressed, it became apparent that Compaq was not comfortable dedicating
the property until after its plans for approval were considered by the City Council.
Accordingly, City staff prepared an agreement which called for a lease of the property
by the City for a period of 3 years, with the City having the option to purchase the
property for the sum of one dollar. The purpose of the option was to insure that if the
City spent sisnii~cant sums constructing the park, that.it would be able to utilize it for
more than three years.
Comoaq's Proposed Lease
Compaq's proposal eliminates any option by the City to purchase the property and
instead retains thc lease term at three years. However, at the end of the tem~, in the
event Compaq does not extend the teim of the lease, it will reimburse the City 80% of
the City's original construction costs for the improvement. By its terms, the proposed
lease does not contemplate reimbursement of any design or architectural costs to the
City, any sums contributed by private sources, nor any expenditures for operations
during the 3-yeer period.
Compaq also seeks to require that the City, in the event of termination of the lease,
cause its property to be restored to its existing condition at the City's sole cost and
The proposal also contemplates that prior to execution of the lease, the City will
prepare and submit fur Compaq's approval architectural dra~vings and access plans
for the park. Should Compaq, for any reason, not execute the lease, the sums spent
for these plans and drawings would be essentially useless.
The hazardous material section of the proposed lease, which was originally dra~ed by
the City to provide some protection to the City in case hazardous materials were
found on the property, has been completely rewritten to delete those protections.
Compaq has completely rewritten the insurance provisions which would, require that
the City purchase substantial commercial insurance policies instead of relying on the
City's current self-insurance program.
Compaq has, in its proposed lease, refused to allow the City the right to assign or
sublet the lease without its written consent, which can be withheld by Compaq "in its
sole and unfettered discretion." This provision would appear to preclude the City
from entering into any sublease or concessionaire asrenment for the operation of the
skate park without Compaq's permission.
There are several other minor char~es which do not substantially affect the terms of
the lease.
Originally, the original proposed lease was drafted when Comp~'s time line for
presenting its development proposal was unknown. Now thai Compaq has filed its
proposal with the City, it would be appropriate for Compaq to include in its proposal
its offer to dedicate the property for the City for use as a skate park. This alternative
would alleviate the necessity for a 3-year lease and would safeguard the use of public
funds to insure that no monies would be spent which would be wasted should
Compaq not extend its proposed lease.
I suggest that the skate park and any other amenities proposed by Compaq as part of
its propo~l be memorialized in a comprehensive development agreement.
I also suggest that, prior to any more st_off involvement with the proposed lease, that
the matter be gubmitted to the City Council, in closed session, for the purpose of
receiving guidance as to the proper approach with Compaq.
3150 Porter Drive San Fganc;.CO P;Io A:to
TII, (6~0} 149-44.00 Fax (~50) ~4~-480C Walnut Crick Talpel
hRp:llwww mooutc~enCem
Fax Cover Page
Date: May 25, 200!
Name FAx Phone
To: Chuck Killicm (408) 777-3401
From: Carol K. DilJon (650) ~49-4800 (650) 849-4812
cdillon~mdbc.com
Pagas (including this ~ver page): 26 ·
Subject: Skate Park Lease Revisod Draft
Messase:
Attache~ is a ~'vised draft of the Skate Park Lease, marked to.show change~ ~om your earlier
~ in~m~ ~ ~ f~ ~ c~en~ a~ ~ a~ bc ~r~ ~d~s ~o~o~ and ~o~
to ~ ~, m~ ~ gAe a~ ~d~. ~k ~
Groun~ Leese~,vitb Optio~ to
~is Ieee is ~ mm ~ .2001 by ~d
Co~ Co~ C~orgion, a nelawa~ c~orah~ ~f~ to
le~e ~ '~o~aq' md $~ Ci~ of ~o, a Cflif~ia ~cipal c~rafi~,
ref~ to m ~s l~ as "Ci~,"
A. Co~ is hh~ o~ of o~*i~ ~ ~ in ~e CiW or.up.no,
Co~r~ of S~ Clga, S~tc of C~ifo~ ~ ~ Exhibit "i~,
w~ch is a~ched ~d ~ a p~ of~ l~se (mf~d
~e ~e~ses") co~is~ng ~20.~. squ~ ~t;
~ ~) ~ ~ p~o~ of c~~ a ~ pgk for public
~d ~er rela~ ~ov~ (call.rely ref~
f~ m ~s le~e,
Article I
Lease of Premises end Term of Leasc
Agre,m-.ent to Lease
Semioa 1,01. For and in conmdenttion of the rent to be paid and the covenants
to be performed by Cit~' under this lease, Compaq agre-.s to lease thc Premises to City,
and City agrees to lease the Premises from Compaq, on the terms and conditions set
forth in this lease. Except as expressly othet'vdse provided in this lease, "the
Premises" includes the real property plus any appurtenances and easeraents descn'oed
in llxhibit ~A" of this lease, exclusive of any Imptovemmts llow or subsequently
located on the Prenuses, notwithstanding that any Improvements may or shall be
constnted as fixed to and as constiutting pan of the described Premises, and without
regard to whether ownership of h~e Improvements is in Cou~paq or in the City.
Status of Title
Section 1.02, Title to the leasehold estate created by this lease is subject to all
exceptions., ear,~rt~ts, rights, rights-of-way, and other matters ofr~cord ~t fo~ on
the Ih'c~liminary Title z~pen i~u~i ly! Fidelity National Titlo Compo~y d~d .,
a~eiey~ of which Cit~ hse ~-.t~,.,l or crmstmctive ~otice. Cil~, acltnowlsdq~s thsr the
Premises ie atttlohod aa ~l~ilsitnot a le,/lV! ~sreel ~mdgr the reqBireme~te of~e'
C. allfomia Subdivision l~,~al~ Act~j~e "~.lt~lV./5,~') s~d lacs! c~'dinances prpmgl~*,-~l
thetetmder_ ~d C/i~ r~presemt.el that this le, ee tr~ssetio0 is exenmt Rom the
reo~iterne~t~ otrthe M4I) Aa because City is
Term of LeMe
Section 1.03. The term ofth/s lease s~ll be for a period of 36 months
¢o~en¢ing on :~: g:te elope of e0erow for this transact/on occurs and ;ontmu/ng-36
month-~ after escrow doacs~ .2001 and eont/nuing for 36
aRer~mh eorr~nencernent d~te~ ~al]ess terrll~ated e~lier aa prodded in this
Compe4 agrees that in the event it does not intend to sqe the Pre~ises for (t~ ow~
p~iiToses a~er the' exviraticrn of the term. Corrinaq 1~jll noti~ t~ in wr/t/n · no late9'
~ban s/x (~ month~ prior m the e~irntion of'~he to,,, ~nd will ne~got/a~ in good
w/th ~il~ for ~n e~e1~iql~ of'~is lease for a peri, od Of thi~l~ OQ) rt*vs ]~r~9r ~, offerir~,
the Premi~.~ arLy t~rd par~, for le:t~e, male ~r oth~ occu~anqy. In the event
Col~l~q elect~ not to extend the ter~ of thi~ Io.~ee due to Con~a/]'s/nt~nded ,'~e ef
the Premises. Corr~l*q sh~ll =lso notlf~/C/~, i~)rrit/Rg no lat~' than mix (fl) months
p~o: to the er~iratic~ o~'the term. md concurrently therew/t~ .~hsll I~R~' to
lm~roveme~t~, a~ a~reed Ll~On hetweer~ C~q ~¢ ~ ~or m con~on and
~qnnab~ d~um~ed ~ CiW ~or to ~~ ~ch.~st intend~ tn
CiW for ~e cost ofr~ ~d/~ rebuildi~ ~e T~vem~ ~t ~oth~ sim,
C~q's oblation m so ~o~en~ate Ci~ shall not a~e in the ev~t the
~ into n~ofizdons ~rdine ~e e~t~ion ofthil lez~e n~na~ this Scion
~nlch do not result ~ the e~o~ of this le~e. ~d ~h~11 nC a~ in the ~t
~d Co~q en~ into any ~ l~-t~ ~ent f~ the ~n~
~i~ ~ Ci~ ~ in the ev~t Ci~ ~ fide m ~e ~i~e~ ~ ~d or ~t
~o]e 2
Rent
2.01. City agrees to pay Compaq and annual r~nt of one dollar for each year
durL'~g thc tena of this leezc to bc paid to Compaq at 10400 N. Tantau Avenue,
Cupertino, Califoraia, or any other place or pheee thet Compaq may designate by
wri~n write to City,
No Partner~p or 1oint Venture
2.02. Nothing in this lease shal! be con~haed ~o render Compaq in any way or
for any purpose a partner, joint vanturcr, or associate in any relationdgp~ wifli tho
City other than that of landlord and truant, nor shall this lease be construed to
author/ze ether to act aa agent for the other.
Art/de 3
rC;C/SPL.~47.01.1(178) 2
Section 3.01. Cit~ shall use the Premises solely for ~e p~o~e of
open to ~e publi~ f~ inline ~k~ sks~i~ ~nd o~er simiI~ roes. but
~i~csllv not i~eh~dine ~e fidine of bi.ties or oth~ vehicle. T~s
the ~on ~d use of a r~ ~m f~, office, p~ng, ~d approxi~tely
1000 sq~e feet of ~le ~ ~in ~e s~ ~k. ~s use dso ~ludes
a~a~ e~om~t~ or righ~ ct' way~ f~ ~ by
v0hi~l~o~'s a~cent p~k~ on o~r ~iva~e ~o~z~lot.
[~~ Co~a~du~ thz ~rovsl of the des~ of the
not ch~E= ~ ~e of ~e ~s ~out ~t o~ ~
Co~ which c~s~t C~ ~ ~thhold in its sole s~d
~omplimce wi~ La~
S~on ~.02. ~' s~l, at CiW's o~ ~st md ~, co~ly
· e ~s~ ~ ~ov~s, ~ta~ m ~ use ~ ~p~y of ~e ~ses
(md ~=ifi~ly not li~ m my p~ ~e or oc~cy by CiW),
~ose s~, o~.mces, ~afi~, ~ ~em~ ~e now
subs~u~tly ~ed fcoll~ve~. "~pli¢~hle I.~ws'5. Iffy lic~e, ~t,
~g ~ven~ a~om~on is ~d f~ ~e la~l
~s g ~y ~ of ~e ~se~, ~ ~11 ~oc~ ~ ~ it ~bu~out
· e t~ of ~s le~. ~ ~t of ~y ~ of ~e~t j~di~, or
adw3ssion by Ci~ in a ~e~ brou~t aging CiW by ~y g~emm~:
~ h~ viewed ~y ouch o~mt~ ~n~, .~lafion,
requir~i~licahle l.aw shill be concl~ive ~ ~e~ Co~
s~l ~ go~ ~ t~fion of~s l~c by C~.
~oMbi~d Uses
Section 3.0~. City shall not use or permi~ the Premises or any portion of the
prermses to be improved, developed, used, or occupied in any manner or for any
purpose that is in any way in violalio~ of any ~lid ]ow~ o~dimmoe, e~ regulation of
~y fedaul, taste, oot~ty, or local gov,,,.,,menud &~eney, body, or ellti~,Arl,~licshle
[ AW or which i.~ ~nt ltlIecifieally [~ennil~ed undsr Sectitm 3_01 of thi.~ lea~.
FUrthermore, City shall not maintain, ~ornmit, or penmt the mainmaance or
commission of troy nuisance as now or hereafter defined by any a~_':_:yAlTgliaahle
Law or der, iaienlll~ lan~roeeedi~g applicable to the Premises or any part of the
Atlide 4
Taxes ~ Utilities
City to Pay Taxes
Section ~.01. City shall pay durin, g thc term of ~h~s l~ase, without abatemcnt~
deduction, or offs~ any and all real and personal property taxes, aeneral and special
assessments, and other charae$ (including any increase caused by a char, ge in the tax
rate or by a change in assessed valuation) of any description levied or assessed during
~ i~,..i of tlgs lease by any governmental agency or em2y on or against Cue
Premises, the Improvements located on the Premises, personal property located on or
in the Premises or Improvements, and the leasehold estate created by this lease.
Proration of First and La~ Year Taxes
Section 4.02. Notwithstanding the provisions ofaection 4.01 of this lease, all
taxes, asscssmenrz, or other charges levied or assessed durin$ the mx years m which
the t~m of this lease commences and ends shall be prorated between Compaq and
City as of !2:01 A.M. on the data the term commen_~__ and on the date the term =nds,
respectively, on the basis of tax years that commence on 1uly 1 and end on June ]0 of
each year. Compaq shall pay the taxes, assessments, or other charges for the Iaa_yc~
in which the term of this lease commences and City shah promptly, on ser',,ice of
writ',en request by Compaq, rennburse Compaq for CiV/'s share of ~hose taxes,
a~sessmants, or other charges. City shall pay the raises; assessments, and other
charges for thc. I~ year in which this lease is to end; and Compaq shall promptly, on
service of written requesl by Cji)', re/mburse City for Compaq's share of those taxes,
assessment, and other char~eS Ci~f sh~11 pay all ~sxe.~ ~.~.~e~-mem~ and
c~-%fee zrly full ~x years occurrir~ &~'/~ ~h~. raem of J'~.~
Separate Azsessmen~ of Leased Premises
Section ~.0~. Should the Premises be assessed and taxed with or as pm of otl~r
property owned by Compaq before the commencement of the term of this lease,
Compaq anel ~ity shall, att~ipt i~ ~eacl faith m arrange with th~ ta~g authorities to
have the Premises taxed and assessed as a separate parcel diatinoI f~om any other
or personal property owned by Compaq. Should the Premises bo as~ased arid taxed
for tho year in which this lease is to commence with or as part ofother property
owned, by Cm~tpaq, the share of the taxes, assessments, or other e, harg~$ for which
City is liable to pay under Section 4.02 shall be dete,xlined as follows: City shall pay
aa amount equal to that portion of the taxes, assessments, and other charges that beers
the same ratio to the total of the tax~s, asse/ii~xants, and oth~r char~es as the ground
area of the Premises bears to the ground area of the total taxed property.
Payment Before Delinquency
aeotion 4.04. Any ~r.d all taxes and assessments and installments of taxes and
assessments r~quired to be paid by City un. der this lease shall be paid by City at least
5~047~73.?.)21 i~ 12.$001
10 days be£ore each such tax, aisessmenc, or instillment of tax or assessment b~¢ome-g
delinquent. On the writtan request of Compaq, City. shall deliver to Compaq thc
official and original receipt evidencing the payment of any taxes, assesrw.~ts, and
other charges required under this Article.
Taxes Payable in Installments '
Section 4,05, Should any spccial tax or as~_~_=menl be levied on or assessed
against the Prea~aises that may be either paid in full before a dehnquency date within
the term of this lease or paid in installments over a period either within or extending
beyond this [casc, City shall have the option of payin$ the special mx or as~ssment m
inst,_?hn~.ts. The fact that the exercise of the option to pay the ~ or assessment
installments will cause the Premises to be encumbered with bonds or will cause
interest to acc'me on the mx or assessment is i~a~erial and shall no: intert'ere with
the flz¢ exercise of thc option by City. Should City exercis, e the option to pay any
such ~ax or assessment in installments, City shall be lmble to pay only
installments becoming due during the ~ of this lease. Compaq shall cooperate with
City and on written request of City execute or join with City in executiug any
mslntro, e~ts required to permit any s~ch special ~ or assessment ~o b~ paid in
installments.
Coa~est of Tax
Scion 4.06. City s~ll have the right to contel, oppose, or object to the
amount or validity of any tax, assessrr~n~, or other charge levied on or assessed
against the prertuses or my p~t or'thc Pren~s~; provideA, however, tha~ the con.st,
oppozition, or objection mu~t b~ filed before the ~ax, assessment, or other charge
which i~ is directed bccorv.~s delmquen! and tha~ wrinen no,ice of the contest,
opposition, or objection must be given Comp~l ar least 10 days before the date
ta~, assessment, or other charge b~cornes delinquent, Compaq st~ll, on v~-iv, en
request of Cit~, join in any such ¢oa~ opposition or obj¢~on if Ci~~ d~tmnin¢~
tha~ joinder is necessary or convenie~! for th~ proper prosecution of the proceedings,
City shal~ be respomible for end shall p~¥ all cnsts and expenses in any contest or
legal proceeding instituted by City. In no event shall Co,,,l, aq b~ subjected to any
liability for costs or expenses connected to any contest by Chty, and City agrees to
indemnify and hold Compaq harmlzs~ from any such costs and expenses.
Furtham~ore, no -~uch con~est, opposition or objection shall be continued or
maintained after the datr the max, assessment, or other cha~ge at which it is directed
becon~s delinquent unless City has done one of the following:
(a) Paid the tax, aas~ssm~nt, or other charge under protest before its becoming
delinquent;
PC/C/$PL3,~7-OI.I.,'IT[) ~
52047573.2J2161 ~0~01
(b) Obtained and maintained a stay of all proceedings for enforcement and
collection of tbe Tax, as~essrr~nt, or other charge by posliag a bond or oth~r s~curity
required by law for such a stay; or
(c) Delivered to Compaq a good and sufficient sure~ bond in an amount spemfieg
by Compaq and issued by a bonding coq~ra~ion lic~rised to do business in California,
conditioned on the payment by Ci~' of the tax, assessment, or charge together unth
any fines, interest, penalties, costs, and expenses that may have accrued or been
imposed thereon w/thin 30 days after final deiermina~on of City's contest, opposition,
or objection to the l~vl, assessment, or other charge.
Tax l~tun~ and Statements
Sect'ion 4,07. Ci~' shall, as belween Compaq and City, h~v¢ the duty ofa~endrr, g
To: preparing, making, and filths any statement; return, rcport, or other msirumen!
required or permiued by law ha connectiori with thz d~mnination, equalization,
reduction, or payment of any taxes, assessments, or other char~es that are or may be
levied on or assessed against the Premises, the Improvemerit~ located on the Prem/scs,
personal property Ioca~ed on or in ~he Premises or Improvements, and the leasehold
e~.a~e created by this lease.
Tax Hold-Harmless Clause
Section 4.08. City shall indenmify and hold Compaq and Compaq's property,
including ~e ~ses ~d ~y I~wve~ now ~ subsequengy l~ed ~ &e
~, ~ee ~d h~,,less ~om ~y liabili~, loss, or da~ge res~g &om ~y
~xcs, ~sesi.~, ~ o~ ch~ges ~qu~ed by ~e ~cle ~ be p~d ~ Ci~ ~d
~om all interest, ~es, ~ oth~ s~ i~sed ~ ~ ~ any sal~ or
oth~ ~ce~ngs to ~e co~ecti~ of ~y ~ch ~es, ~se~ts, ~ o~
ch~es.
v~C/sP'.3.2?.oI.:O ?s)
Utilities
Section 4.09. City s.hall pay or cause to be paid, and hold Compaq ~nd Compaq's
property including the Premises free and harmless from 'all charges for thc fumishin~
of ~as, water, electricity, telephone s~-rvice, and other pubhc u~hties to the Premises
during the lease's term and for the removal of garbage and rubbish/rom the Premises
duri.~g the term of this lease.
Payment by Compaq
Section a.10. Should City fail to pay within the t/mc specified in this Article any
taxes, assessmcms, or other charges required by thi~ .Article to be paid by City,
Compaq may, without notice to or demand on City, pay, discharge, or adjust that
assessment, or otlm- charge for the ber~fit of City. In that event, City shall promptly
on written demand of Compaq reimburse Compaq for the full amoum paid by
Compaq in pa)y, discharging, or adjusting that tax, assessment, or other c2mrge
together with interest thereon at the the~-maximum legal rate from the d~te of
payment by Compaq until the date of repayment by City. If this Article does not
specify the r/me w/thin which City must pay any charge requ/red by this Article, City
slmll p~y that charge before it becomes delinquent.
Article 5
Construction by City
Consa'uction
Section 5.01. City r~y, at City's sole cost and expense, constru~ or cause to be
construc~i on ~ Premises, a skate park and ancillary, facilities in the manner and
according to the lerms and condi~ons specified in ~his Article. Cmee C. ity
e4~n~lion of the Iwig~rnvem~rs Ciliy shall dili~,~tlv tw~e~utio~,s!~h
Requirern~nl of Compaq's Writttm Approval
Section 5.02. No slru~are or other ir~-rovomo~tl~vc, ro~,t of any kind shall be
¢ouscru~ted on the Premises tmlcss and unlil the plans, specifications,, and proposed
location of that sl2uct'0re or if~p~¥ea~0~tI~-~rovem~t bare been approved in writin~
by CompS. Yurthe~ m~ePurthermore, no structure or other
improvem,.~a~lr~provem~t shall be consiructed on L~ Premises that does na comply
~i~ plans, specifialions, and loca~ons apl~oved m writing by Compaq. Such
approval by Compaq shall not unreasonably be withheld. Withont limirir~
for~oip~. Cor~a~pnd City steknowle~ tbnt it rpq~y ]a~ Ilecessn~ ~'~r
iTr~'overn~ntt to ~ql'O~q'll,])r~'n%'. i~cltldir~ modifications ~o Corrlp~q's
anc] So the l~t~pe~l~y'_~ draln~l,e .~.~te.m Wthe 7s~ies cannot a~ee ~ m the ~e
~gd n~mre of ~uch t~ov~L. W~ffiin th~ (~0) d~s a~r the d~ o~h~ l~a~.
e~e~ ~a~ ~ ~ipat~ ~ I~.e ~on ~ffe~ ~ofiee m th~ other, i~ which
~zh~ ~ shall b~ve n~ liahi]j~ to the other. ]~ no event ~a~l Co~a~ have
fi~nci~ ~o~ibfli~ for i~rovem~t~ made'to~o~aq'~ ~e~ in c~nnecHo~
w~ thi~ le~e.
~fion ~d Sub~si~ of Pl~
Section 5.03. ~.or to the (a) Wi~h~ 180 days ~ffer ex~cuti~ of~i.~ I~se.
~pim of drawings ~ ma~riah in the fom~ ofp[~0, eto~tion0: ~Jem, and
~v~ the ~j~hitecm~l des~nl.~nd a~a~ nl~pKf~ ~e skzte p~rk
~cilifie~ to Compaq._Ci~ sh~l, at Ci~'s o~ cost ~d e~e, ~gage a lic~s~d
~c~t ~ ~ae~ m ~p~ pl~m ~d ~ificafions f~ tho skam p~k ~nd
~cil~ty ~nd =~al[ oubmit tho follo~ing m Comp~ for ~prevah
~n) Wi~in lgO &ys affor ex~Ii~ of~i~ I~, ~wo ~eo ot'~awm~ md
mam~al~ in ~he fo~ ofplan~ olo~fio~, socfion0, ~d mndz~
~fficient to ~n~y thc ~o'~i~u~l &~i~ of tho ~ato park ~d ~n~l~
~ (b) Wi~ 1~ dnys aff~ ~rov~ ~j ~aq of thc imm~ spoci~od i'n
m~ti~ (a) ofth~ ~o~ and ~e ~bt~ing by ~W of ~y v~oe pe~ w~,
mit0, or mzoeing mq~red for tho skate park, ~vo ~io9 of detailed wor~g
~ ck~park and moiEa~ md 0hall submit tho fol~wi~ ~o Comp~ for
a~mval:ghzll ~ submifl~ to Ca~a~ far it. ~z.nnnble ~hin 30
~roval
aff~ the dnm ofthi~ le~e_
~pq's ApFov~ ~ ~j~fi~ of Pl~
Se~on 5.~. Wi~ ~ 0 da~ ~er receipt by Co~aq of ~y of ~e dock,s
s~ m C~ f~ a~roval ~d~ Scion ~.0~ of~ 1~, Co~
~ ap~ove ~ose ~~ by ~d~ing C~'s appm~ ~ ~ch
do~! ~d r~ing one ~ of ~ d~ls to Ci~, or C~ s~l
~ no,ce to Ci~ of ~y obje~ons Comp~ ~y haw to ~ose d~.
Co~aq's faille ~o ~v~ ~en no,ce to Ci~ ~in ~ 30-~y ~od ~
~e con,ye ~en~ ~all ~mte ~ov~ by Co~ of~e doc~
so ~ded.
Changes in Plans
Section S.05..after approval by Compaq of the documents pertaining to the skate
park and ancillary facilities described in Section 5.03(b) of this leass,~.(L~ any
substantial ~hange in the plans or specifications for the skate park shall be approv~
by Compaq. For purposes of this Sec[ion, "substantial change" means one that
~'c,~p~.2?.o;.:O TS) 8
ff20&7~73.~/2~ $12-OOgl
~actterially changes the exterior appear~ce of skate park. the site of a~v
lr~roveme~tn, or pa~kir~and accens. Co;*~aq's failure :o give wfi.'tten notice to City
of any objections Compaq rtmy have to any proposed changes wi~in 30 days aier a
writ:ch statement of the proposed changes has been given to Compaq by City shall
constiurte Co,~paq's ap~oval of the clumgcs. Minor changes in work or rn~terlals not
constituting a substantial cl~nse neecl not be app:o 'ed by Compaq but a copy, of the
altered plans and sper, ific~ons reflecting those changes shall be given to Compaq,
AAI Work on Written Contract
Section 5.06. All work required in the conslntction of the skate park, including
any site preparatson work, landscaping work, and utility ins:allation work, as well as
actual construction work on the skate parle, shall be performcd only by cempetent
contractors licensed under the,laws of the State of Catifomia and shall be perfo,,,ed
in accordance w/th wr/tten contracts with those contractors. Bach such contract shall
provide that the final payment under the con,'ract due to the contractor sh,]l bc/n an'
amount equaling at least 1~$ of the full amount payable under thc conuact arid shall
not be paid to conuactor until whichever of the following, last occurs:
(a) The expiration of ~5 days from the da~e of recorclin$ by City as owner of a
Not/ce of Complet/on of the skate park, City agreeing to record ',ha! No~/ce of
Completion promptly within the time spec/fled by law for the record/n~ of thgt notice;
(b) 'Cae settlement and discharge of all liens of record cla/med by persons who
supplied either labor or materials for Ibc construction of the skate park.
Performance and Lien Bonds
Section ~.07. Bach contractor engaged'by Cit~' to perform any scrvices for
conslructinn of skate park, including any constru~on, site preparation, utility
installation, landscaping, or parking lot construction services, shall furnish to City,
who shall deliver copies of both of the following to Compaq, at the contraclor's own
expense at the time .of entering a centract with City for those set, rices.
(a) A bond issued by a COtl~ate surety author/zed to issue surety insurance in
California in an amount equal to 100% of the conlract price payable under the
contract sccurin$ the faithful performance by the contractor of its contract with City;
and
(b) A bond issued by a corporate surety authorized to issue surety insurance in
California in an amount equal to 100% of the contract price payable under*,he
~'contract securing the payment of all claims for the pgrfo, uance o. flabor or serv~c_~_
.ora,. or the fumisbLu8 of materials for, the performance ofthe contract.
PC~'CJSPL3.27.OI .t ( I 7'1) ~
Com'4mlmu~ v,,i~ Law aud S~an~ar~s
Section 5.08. Thc ~tc p~k ~d ~ciU~ facili~es shall bc cons~uct~, all w~k
on ~e ~e~s~ s~ll be p~o~ed, ~d ~1 buil~ngs or otl~
i,llpf0v~m~t~l~ov~ent.m on ~c ~s~ s~ll be ~ec~d in ~~ ~th ail
~lid laws, ordinun~, rogulatio~, ~d ord~s of ail ~nl, s~te, COUnty, or 10C~
~v~,ment~ ag~cieo or e~tifi~ havingjt~ia~ e~ the P~mises; proviaed,
kowever, that ~y' ~uom or o~ i,..p~eut orc~ ~ ~o ~emiseo, iacludiug
· e ~tate p~k, shall ~ aoom~to have ~ so. scrod in full oompliaaoo with all
oud~ valid laws, ordmaue~, m~la~i~, md ordem when ~ valid find ~o~tc of
Ooou~uoy emitliug Cityte o~upy mid me~e s~ure ~ otbcF im~ov.m~t has
bc~ duly lo.od by ~ ~t~m~ us~noi~ or ~tioo~Jieshle Laws. ~1
w~k p~ on ~ ~ses ~ ~s lease, ~ ~o~ by ~s lease, s~l be
do~ ~ a g~d w~auli~ ~et md ~ly wi~ n~ ~t~i~s o~ ~od q~i~ ~d
MeChanics' Liena
Section ~.09. At all times during the term of this lease, City shall keep the
Premises and all [,,i~mvemen~s now or here~.Rer located on the Premises free arid
clear of all liens and claims of liens fcr labor, services, materials, supplies, or
equipment perforated on or furnished u~ the Premises. Should ~ity fail to pay and
discharge or cause the Premises to bc released from any such lien or claim of lien
within 20 days after s.,rvieo en City of wni~e~ ,oquest from Compaq to do
the e'~iq?er~ce of snehJjlm or claim of lien. Compaq may pay, adj~t, compromise, and
discharge any sucl~ lien or claim of lien on any terms and m any manner that Compaq
way deem appropriate. In that event, City shall, on or before :he first day of',he next
calendar month following any such payment by Compaq, reimburse Compaq for the
full arnoult! paid by Compaq in payin$, adjusting, compromising, and discharging that
lien or claim of Li;.-4i~ll, including.any attoeneya' ices or other costs expended by
Compaq, toSether with interest at the.then.maximum legal rate from the date of
payment by Compaq to the date of repayment by City.
Zoning and Use Permits
Section ~.10. Should City deem it necess~y or appropriate 1o obtsln any use
permit, variance, or re'zoning of the Premises to construct or operate the skate park,
Compaq agrees to execute any documents, petitions, applicalions, and authori_z~tious
that may be necessery or appropriate and hereby appoints City as Compaq's attorney
in fact to execute in the name and on behalf of Compac[ ally such documents,
petitions, applicatio~ls, or auT. borizations; pro~ded, however, that any such pemlits,
variances, or re, zoning shall be obtained at the sole cost and expense of City and City
agrees to protect and saYe Compaq end the property of Compaq, including the
Premises, free and harmless from any such cost and expense.
Owner~ip of Inrpro~,ents
Section ~.l I. Tile to all Iml~ovements, including the skate park and ancillary
facilities, to be constructed on ~e Premises by City shall be owned by City until
expiration of the term or earlier termination of this lea.~ All Improvements,
including thc skate park, o~ the Premisas at the expiration of the lerm or earlier
te-~,i~ation of this lease shall, without c~,,',gensation to City, then automatically, and
without any act of Cit7 or ~' third party become Compaq's properS, City
surrender the lm~oYements ~o Compaq at the ~xpiration of the ~crm or earlier
te~,,2~ation ofthis lease, free and clear of all liens and encumbrances, other than
those, if any, permitted under this lease or otherwise created or consented to by
CO~l~paq in it~ sole discret~o~ provided however that Corr~aq m;~y requi~ ~'..ity
3~rnove all Iml~rov~ments n,~d restore the Premi,es sod ~, moditq~'.atio~s m~-,te to
Cnn~aq's i~ce~t pro,~e~ tn'the conditi~ exLqtlr~ a~ of ibc date ~¢t'bls I es~s BI)an
P~/SPL.147.0!.IU?8) 1 1
520~7~i73.2/2~
v,~tte, notice to Cilw delivered no ]~te- than 30 d~'s prior to lhe end of the l~r,l,.
ac~owledge, md deliv~ m Compaq ~y ~s~t r~ques~d by Co~aq as
nece~ m Co~'s ~imon ~ pe~fcct Cou~'s fiSht, 21le, ~d in.rest to
l~ovemen~ md ~e
~cle 6
R~a~ ~d ~sto~ti~
M~ by Ci~
Section &.01. At all ~mes d~ :he ~oftMs l~e Ct~ shall, at Ci~"s
cost ~d exp~e, k~ ~d ~ntain ~ ~e~ses, ~l ~ptov~, and
a~cea (mclud~ lan~aped ~d p~g are~) now or h~ea~ on
~emi~s, ~ good ~d~ ~d rep~ ~d tn a safe ~ cl~
c~n~si ii;a~ with the ~men}s s~ f~h in' the a~ehsd ~shlhit gR~.
R~ui~m~ of Gov~tfl Agmcies
Section 6.02. At all ~ during ~e t.,,,s of~ l~e, Ci~, at Ci~'s o~ co~
md ex. se, ~1 ~ ali of the follo~
(a) Make ~1 ~tera~om, a~i~o~, ~repaits m ~e ~s or ~e
~ovmm~ on ~e ~s~ mq~d by my s~lid law, ~d~oe, gamt~ o~,
m~ta~oa now or ~a~ m~e or i~a by ~y f~l, emro, eo~w, local, or
0~ ~vc...=~l ~&~oy or enliD'A~lieahle I uw;
~) Ob~e md coni~ly ~ ~1 ~ulid le~, ~di~, ~utos, o~,
~lafio~ now or h~eafl~ ~ o~ i~u~ r~ec~g ~e ~ ~ ~
~prov~mU ~ ~e ~m.2~ bye)' foder~, state, ~m~, loofl, o~ o~or
g~v~tal a~oy ~ ~fi~plicable I~ws:
(c) Con~ if Ci~, ~ Ci~'s ~le d~gefi~, ~s by ~fi~ ieg~
pro~s ~t m g~ ~ md ~li~fly ~os~ ~ ~e ~ of Ci~,
~e n~ of Oi~ ~ Co~ whm ~optiate or t~d, ~e vflidiW g
~licabiliv m ~ ~ of~y ~w, or--ce, ~m~ ~ ~ ~afi~ now
g h~fla amdo ~ ioou~ by ~y fedeal, gars, oomW. 1~ ~ o~
~g, ~ou~ ~~ in the n~a of ~W md O~, ~1 be ~ut
~ obse~'e ~ ~ly d~ng ~ c~t~ ~ ~e c~m~d law, ~i~ee.
(d) Indemmfy and hold Cornpaq and the prope,~ of Compaq, including the
Premises, free and harm]ess from any atn. d all liabili~, loss, damages, fines, penalties,
claims, and actions r~sulr~ng from City's failure to comply with and perform the
r;quirements of this Section.
City's Duty to Restore Premises
Section 6.03. Il'any lime dUnng this lease's term, any L'nprovcments now or
hereal~r on the l~emises are d~s~roy'cd in whole or in part by fire, theft, the elements,
or an.v other cause not tho fault of Compaq, this lease shall continue in fitll force and
effect and City, at City's own cost and expense, may repair and restore the darnatcd
Improvements. Any restoration by City shall comply with ori~qnal plans for thc
lmprovemerlts described in Arli¢le 5, except as mai,' be modified by City and
approved in writin8 by Compaq. In all other r~spects, the work of repair and
restoratiori shall be done in accordance with the requirements for, oriLdnal constr~tion
work on the Pr~mises set forth in Ariicle 5 of this lease.
Article 7
Inderenity:
Section 7.01. City shall mde,~i/-,ify and hold Compaq and Compaq's property,
including ',he Premises and Improvements now or h~eafter on the Prmniscs, f/cc and
h~u~dess from any and all liability, cra/ms, loes, damages, or exposes resulting
City's occupation and use of the Premises, specifically including, without limitation.
any liability, claim, loss, damage, or expense arising by mason o/the following:
(a) The death or injury of any person, including City or any person who is an
employee or agent of City, or by reason cf the damage to or destruction of ~
propcrty, includinf~ property owned by City or by any person who is an employee or
agent of City, fi'can any cause wherever while that person or property is in or on the
Premises or in any way connected with thc Premises or with any of the Improvements
or personal property on the Premises;
(b) The death or injury of any person, including any person who is an employee
or agent of City, or by reason of the damase to or destruction of any property,
including property owned by' City or any person who is an employee or agent of City,
caused or allegedly caused by either (1) thc condi~/on ot the Pram/scs or
bt~ilding or improve,-nont~uy lw~Trovement on the Premises, or (2) some act or
omission ou the l~emises of City or any person in, on~ or about the Premise.' with the
perrrtiss/on and eor, sont of City;
(c) Any' work performed on the Prer~ses or rna~enels fi~'aishcd to ~c ~ses
at ~c ~t~ce ~ r~e~ of ~ ~ ~y ~s~ ~ ~U ~g for ~ ~ be~lf of
Civ; ~
(d) Ci~'~ f~l~o ~ p~o~ any provision of~is 1o~ ~ ~ co~ly wi~ my
~qui~nt of l~w oT ~y ~qLfirem~t imp~ed on C~ ~ ~i~ by ~y duly
a'uthor~od ~v~m~x~l a~n~ or poIi:ical ~bdi~isi~)j~hle T.aw.
~4:~2J21 ~!2-0001
Hazardous Substances and Materials
Reetion ?.02. CiLv sh~ll not t,sn.~ or i~er/~it
sto~ dischs~ released ~ di~s~ o~ in. ~m u~ ~ about the ~iseq
Without limm~ the fore~oi~ i~s~ HA~srdoLjq Mste~a]s ,~ or ~ilted by ~,
r~ult in eontsmlns~o~ of the ~emises. ~i~. at i~ exn~se, shill pro~ ~ke all
gcfions n~qssW to r~ the ~emis~q
g~osed ~iah~ mathod,~iw shall pr~tb, ~fi~ C~aq and
Coral's ~ no, oval before ta~ $~ r~edjal action in re~se m ~e
pres~ of any Ha~nrdnus Ms~aIs ~ ent~ng into any s~l~t ~ml.
cons~t d~er~e or oth~ ~a-~romi~ ~ r~e~ tos~ claims rela~ to Hazardous
MsI~als i~ on. u~d~ ~'s~t ~e
(~/ "Hg~a~ous MateNal" me~
livir~ ~nis~ ~ ~bina6on ~eofwhich is ~ m~ be hs~rdous I~ the
envi~m~ ~ human or animal health ~ safe~ Oue to its rad~oaai~tv. ~imhi]i~
~osjviW, re~v~W ~ln~vi~. taxicab, ea~n~ici~, mutation.
p~mxiciW. inf~ou~esl or oth~ bagful ~ ~t~fial~ ha~! ~ or
effe~s. HmsMoua Marsala shall iflclMe. ~thol]t
~vdroca~ons. inc~di~ ~A oil ~ s~ ~tion thai Ag~sms r~n.
polycbl~na~d bi~henvlq ~. m~hane n~d all ~b~ances ~ich nqw or ~ fha
~mre InKY ~ d~fled sa ~'hs?s~uq suhntafle~," "hs?ardoun wssfeS"
b~ardons wsn~s." ~s~a~nuq mat~sl~" '~oxiC nubs~c~" "infecfio-~
~i~bs~n~ous ~s "'~3ica] was~_"
othe~ ]isl~. defn~ oI r~ulsted
p~). C. iBr shall m4gmni~/, d~-nd 0lY cotms~l reaaorl~hly ~tsb!e ~o Co,~,~.
~o~t and hmld C~aq and Co~'n dir~ office. ~ta and eti-~l~v~s nnd
a~m~s' ~nd consultsn~' f~-~ and ov~hl snd ~-~n~ ~s~l
~md~ ~ ~ ~houv the ~e~s~* d.~l~ ~ whic~ is ~sus~ or pee,,',i~ ~ Ci~
or ~ ~ilure of~ to ~ ~th aqy ~li~hle Law ~lh ~eot ta ~srdOu/
Mst~]s on. undo. ~ or sho~t the ~i~es which T~ caused or
[nnnranCe
lh~
(al Commeq;igl g,eqgTp! liahilil;)' insurance ~lyi,2g to the ,.~e ~md oc, c~anc, y
£~e Premises and the lrr~rovement~ arid any part thereof, gUcb jv~ur~nc~ shall
mc',ude broad form cnnwa~.mal liabili~ msurancgd~overgge insurir~
under this ]ezge. gnch ~v~ shall have a minims limk ofliabfliW of not less
~haq ~ree million dollars ~g~.~O 0~ ~ ~ oc~ce. All Such poli~e~ ghsl) be
~ m ~lv m a11 ~di~ i~,W pr~ dsm~. ~6i~nal i~uW and other
~v~d Iom~. howev~ occzmioned oc~mng duri~ t~ ~olicv t~
foliowi~ endosperm to the ~em such ~dms~entm z~ ~a1~ ~vailable:
~l~ees a~ addifi~sl in~urM~ Oii~ vro~di~ bro~ fo~ ~r~
~v~ and p~ucfs ~legd ~ationq cnve~ (whem ~lieahle3.
deleti~ a~ ]i~or liabiliW excb&qi~A and (v~ ~vi~ f~ ~v~age ofo~M and
po~M ~u~bile liahili~ if ~lienh]~, guch i~sur~ shall ~a~ Co~a~
~nd a~ oth~ ~ d~e~at~ ~ Co~ an an addi~onnl m~nred ~hall
ineh~e the liabili~ aa~m~ h~und~ hy CiW. shall ~o~de that it
insurance shall prn~de ~r sev~hili~ ofinte~.% ~ha11 ~h~ provide ~at an acLor
~inni~ of~e of the named iaa.redn which would v~d or othe~se
~v~e shall not r~e or yoid the coyote nn m a~ inked aha~l a~d cover~
f~s ban~ on a~misnione. ~u~ nr dnm~ which ~.~d ~ ~9se ~r the
~n~ of~ioh oc~,w~ or atone ia whnle ~ in pa~ du6~ the ~li~ p~. ~d
~hall provide that ~'s innurnnee ~t ~ ~ ~11 ~nae a cogent e~fieam of
jaaa~ce m be in~ m Eo~aq ~ ~i~ce of the re~ir~ insurance cove~e, and
that ~he ce.~ca~ of j.~cg ~nll ~i~ that Co.i~aq will ree~ve 30 d~'
Ov~ee ~i.en notice ~ ~h~ inmir~ prior to any caneellatiog~Bon~enewal or
ms. iai cha~e of such cove:
~ "~U R~n~' ~ i.g.~Og iacl~i~ ~kl~ l~kaeea, va. daliam and
~alicioua mi~hief and plate ~ns ~m~ cove.~ all Of Ciw's ~ on ~e
~i~s. and all fi~ten and l~v~ta made ~ ~n~ll~ by or on behalf of Ciw
in ~ amount of~ot Ieee than ~e hund~ ~c~ f[O0~ of~e ~11 ~laee~ co~
thereof Isu~ect to a c~me~ial]v ~a~nhle deducible amalfi, pa shall ~om time
m ~me be detained b~ Ci~ nnd in fa~ ~tisfa~ W Co~a~ Co~aq
pained aa 1,o2~ P~vee ~th m~t to T~ov~m in which Co.aa hag
in~urable in~st: and shal] provide that Ci~'s insurance ~t pr ~ok~ ~ll ca-~e a
n.~l e~c~e ofinsu~nce tO be isled to C~q e~ evid~ of~e
innura, ce ~v~Mq. and ~at the c~cate of insurance shall ~i~
~11 Tee~ve 30 d~s' ~ce ~g~ no, ce ~om the ine~ p~m m
p~renewal. ~ mar~al ~ ofs~h
(~ W~er's C~m~fion lg~nce m ~he amnunte and cov~ea
imd~ ~to~ work~'s c~nafi~ 1~, nad ~o~d~ s ~y~
favor of Co~a~ wh~e allow~ ~ ~lic~hle 1 .aw. diaa~ii~ a~
~t laws ~licahle to the ~i~ and g~l~'s LiahiliW lnnu~ee ~th
li~a of not less than ~e milli~ dolla~ tgl_O00 ~ gach Aeei~t. naa million
~11~ (gl .0~.00~ ~imane - Poli~ Li~t and one mil~ dnll~a
Di.~e~ - Raeh Pmnlovee. or such higher nmonnt.~ a~ mq~v be ~ui~ed b~' A~licable
(fi3 A~ oth~r fo~ or ~cm~ of in,atonce a~ Co~q m~ red.nobly re~ce ~om
ti~ to time in ~m~nt~ and ~ insu~bi~ r~ ~inst which a ~d~t ~an~ would
~ i~elf.
7.(M AIl ~olicies of insurance p[o~ded f~ herein {hall ~ issued ~ in~nce
co~nie~ ~h {~ra! ~li~hal~s~ ra~,na of not 1em{ than A-VH z, rated jO the
~ost cu~t available "Be~'s In~ur~ R~ort~ "~ the ~nan~ai
~d n~ ~ro~bl~d ~ doi~ hn~ine~{ in ~e Rt~te ofCalifo~ia R~h poh~e~ {hall
be for the mutual ~nd joint h~e~t and ~mc6on of Co~a~ Ci~ nnd ~h~
h~eina~ve ~6aeed. ~d c~es ofins~n~ ~eof ~h,il he deliv~ed to
Co~aq wi~in 10 d~s ~or to ~* deliv~ of}assertion 9f the ~izes to Ci~' and
~a~ wmthm ]0 d~s follow~ the ~pl of such ~)i~ or ~]iciea AIl
~m~al ~1 li~hili~ and ~ d~m~e ~lici~ ~hall eont~m a provision
th~r Cn~a ~d znv orh~ ~dd~nl i~n~. al~o~ nzmed ~ ~ddMo~J. ~sureds.
8hzl[ nevertheless ~ ~fifled to r~over und~ ~a~d ~oli~ies for a cove~ loss
As o~en a, a~ poli~ shaq e~i~ ~ m~inate. ~e~l or a~i~onal ~alieie~ shall be
~red and maintained ~%' ~i~ in like ~sno~ nnd to like ~nt AIl c~cial
~al liabili~, nr~ dam~e a~ 9~ raqual~' ~olicie~ lhall be
o~ce bn~i~ CiW's insurance shall be ~ma~. and ~'~ ~are shall be_
~s ~nd shall not be con~hut~.
Co 's
7.05 ~haulfl ~iw fail m t~ke ~Laed ke~ in for~ ~ach insurance ~oli~ r~ired
~d~ thii le~{e, or should mmch ~ngu~ce n~ ~ ~ved by ~aq and shg~ld
Ci~ not ~cfi~ the ~i~}~tion ~tkin S days a~ ~w~ notice ~ Co~aq to CiW~
~ effem ~ch instance at ~e ~nle ~st of Ci~ and all ~]~s.~ C~aq ~hall be
immediate~ p~ahle ~ ~ to Co~ n~ addifi~al ~t wi~ot~t ~di~ to
other ~t~ ~d ~di-~ of Co,,'~ und~ thiq lea,e. No~p~val by Co~
a~ in~u~, or ~e ~ n. ~difi~ ofa~ ~oli~, or a~ cov~ ~ amount~f
~nsuranee or a~ deductible amou~ shall ~e ~n~ ~ a ~ea~m~on ~' Co~
Imount of in~n~e or d~nefib!e ~d C~W ~ea ~11 ~k and re.one.iii
any Msdefluncv ofin~ce coyote or ~ fnilnm
Wa~v~
/,C,'C./SR..1-27-01.:0 78) 1 7
Section 7.02. Compaq he.,eby warrants to Cit~ that it is uaavmro o.t'. the cxi.~ter~ce
of any toxic sub~tance or hazardou~ materials (a~ thoootot~m ara dofiacd by the
California Health a:~ Safety Cache) on or u~d~ tho Premise--,. Compaq t~rther agrees
to inderrmify, hol~dnarmle~ and defend the-CAty asains~ any -damage, Io~: o~ ]i:g~ility
ari~ng from thc pn~c~ee of any ~oxic sub-stance o~ haz;u-doa~ material o~ the loa~cd
Prembcs not ca'sued by Ci17/. City i~ prohibited from angaglng in any t, sea of thc
Prm.~i~s that involves thc use of toxic suty'~tanoo~ or hazardous mate:isls.7.06
Notv, nth-nta~diRg a,'x'thin8 to tho eoutrm:y sustained he~'ein, to the extent permitted bO,
~heir re%pecfive l~olici~ of insurnnee a~d to the extent ot'i~nura~ee t~roce~d.n received
wi~[~ respect to the los~ [,C. orn~aq and City each hereby waive any right of recovery
again.~t the other ~ar~y ~nd ~aain.~t a.~ other l~ar~ maintainit~g a l~olicy of i~e~rllnCe
with reject to the T,~;£¢,vement.~ or any nonion/ah~'reqf or the eonten~ of arly of the
~name tbr ar6' lc, ns ar dan~Rgg, nuamine~l fly nnch 9tlL~r parly with re.apect to the
ln~l'ovement.~ or the Prg'~O~,0r a~ly portion of'aRy thereof ar the ea~t~nca of the
~iTra~ or.ar~y Ol)era6cm. t, be~11, whether or not such lo.nn is cm~aed ILY the fa, lt ar
T)c, gli. gence of such other pm-~. Either par~ shall noti~'y the other 17~ if the policy of
in.nurance carried ILy it does not permit the fe~goiRg waiver. If ark¥ policy of
lnnurance relafn8, ta the Premiss esrrjl;d ]R,v City. ar nRY policy of in.ri, ronco relating
to ~ Premises caeried by Corn0~, does not pewnit the foregoitlg waiver or if thc
covera~ under ar~y such policy would be invalidated aa a resLlt of such waiver. City
pr Corr~pAq shaJ~, sa %~lTlieahle and if pp~.~iblc, obtain from the in.~urer under sne. h
pOi jOY a waiver of all righ,,tn of~ubrogation the in.outer m~ht have ag, stoat City or
Compaq, ms applicable, maintninin~ a policy of inm~ra,~ covering tl~e same loss. in
corm. cOrses with any claim, loss or dam~g covered ~,- suel1 po]icy~
?b'ticle 8
Assignment and Subleasing
No Assignment without Compaq's Consent
Section $.01. City rllay a::i~...not .~ell. nasi,gn, pieq~ge, l~gotheca~ or otherwi.~e
t~ansfer this lease or any interest in this lease, subject ~oor sublet the Premises
(collectively. "T~ansfer".~, ~vithout the prior written consent of Compaq. Compaq
shall not unreasonably withhold or delay itc eoa,n, ent, and o~al~g, aat oon~n~ if the
propo~od a~vigaoo i~ financially qualifi0d sad hoc suffi~icot erga~ienee in the
operation and manage'neat of ~ate patlfz ~ porfe..,., a~l thc-ab c~.~.ems, undertakings,
and oovcaan~ of thio lea~ and all e~he~ a~ ..... ex~ oatamd into by CAW which relate
to thc. manage.,,~;~t,.og¢,~ioe, =ainteaanoe, oomtruction, and reatoral~oa of tho
Improve,~,e~.,ts and thc l~,;ai~es. To a~-~i, st Compacl in doz...;-'nieg whctbe~ er not the
prepmed ar. Agnee i~oo qualffiodr City shall furnish to Compaq at no exponce to
Compaq. before tl.,at at~ignment, detailed and comp[0~e f'manaial-~tatoments of the
proposed ar, sig;~ee, audit0d by aee, t[~ed public accountant ~oaaonabl) satisfactory to
Cxm:peq ('if thc p~opoaed t,a~f~roc.e~uacs its a:aternenta to be so audited ia it~ normal
cour0e of bu~inec~)~ to$othe~ ~vith detailed and complete informatioa about the
bu~ines~ o£the prepared ~01gz..eo, including it~ experience iR op~fating skate parks.
Compaq s~l] have 30 dGy~ afcer rc, ce~pt o£the reformation ck~cribed above
wh~hc~ ~t ~ns~ or does not ~n~nt to tl~ prop~ ~l~mont, A~e~.~ a~' ~uoh
~tif]c~tit~ by Com~q dm'~ng the ~0 dw/~o& ~m~ shall bo o,~.ol~siveP/
dee~od to have eom~t~ to ~e ~i~mm~t A ~o~t by ~m~q to one
~m~nt ~i~i not be doomed to bo a ~oat t~any ~equ~: ~i$~m~t. Any
othe~vi~a ~..~od by ~is A~iale., w~ch m~ be ~dthhe~d by Ca~aq i~ ~t~ sole
a~ ~nfc~d di~on.
Ciw's ~t ~ Suble~e
S~ 8.02. Ci~ shell hav~dz N~ht ~o ~bl~ ali or ~y pomon of thc
~ ~ti~ to fim~, md at a]i rimes du~n~ the ~em~ of ~h~ ]e~:A~ T~n~fcr
D~zt is m~de wi~o~ Compaq's c~q p~vidc~ shall be null z~d
:h:~ ~e fotlo~g ~s~ition~ ~ ~:op~on ofC~ ~hsll c~timte
defa-It ~ C~ under this I~e a~d Co~sq shill be ~tifled ~ ~ur~e
reme~ avail.able to Co~q und~ th~ ~s of~is lez~e ~ u~e% ~ laws of the
S~te ofCalif~ia ~e scc~t~ac~ ~f~' p~rs by C~aq ~om a pr~osed
~nsf~ee shall n~ c~itt~te ~ns~t to such T~ ~ Co~ or a teen. ilion of
l~cle.
(~) Tho term of~y ou~lease a~ll not ~d ~n~ ~he m~m of ~h~l~;
(b') Any and ~i1 ~1~ ~II ~ ox~o~ly ~ su~eot to
~mants, ~d condifion~ of t~ ~m~ and
~) Any ~b~enant ~11 be ~eq~ired to a~ to ~aq in the e~st of oily';
dcfsult undo~ th~ ic~.
~icle 9
Default ~d
Continuation of Lease in Effect
Sect/on 9.01, Should City breach this lease :,':~.~ ahendon the Premises before the
natural cxpiration of thc lc~.w's term, Compaq ma}' either t,~r,iiin&?~, lhi.~ lease
l~t:rst],nt to Section 9.02 of coll~rllie this lease in effect by not t~i-air, at/ng City's right
to possession of the Premises, m which event Compaq shall be emided to enforce all
Compaq's fights and remedies under this lease, including the right to recover the rent
specified i~ ~ lease as i~ becomes due under this lease.
Tw.,~llation and Unlawful Delainer
PC,C/SPz.3-I?-O~. ~ a ?l) 19
Section 9,02. In the event of City's defauh under ffa.~ lease: Compaq may
terminate this lease by ~nen notice ~o City a~d may also do the following:
(a) Bring an action to recover the following from City:
(1) Th{~ wor. h at the time of award o£the unpaid rem that had been e~nod
at tho time of ten~ination of th0 loa0e;(l) The right.~ and remedies described in
California Civil Code Section 1951.2:
(2) ,amy other amoum necessary' to compensate Compaq for all detriment
proximately caused by City's failure' to perform City's obligations under Lhis
lease; :~fl-_ which inelt~des, v,4thout limiTst, jRr), (~ nrLy costq or expenses
incurred by Corqpa;l in ~eoveri~g poa.~ession o~the Premises. maintainir~ ar
!Treservir~ the Ptemi.~ee a~er such deirault.j~l~) pre,~arir~ the Prerr~se.e for
reletti~l~ tn a new t~s~t. (J~/s'R)( r~sirs or alterations to the Premia~.~ tar such
relettlr~iL f~/lpqil~ coi~imissiorts m'chitect's fees knd ~ other cost.~
ne~e.eeisr)~ or ~lll)~'Q. pria~e either to relet the Premises or. if re~qonahlv necessary
in order to relet t~arerrliaes, to salt them to another beneemal
· C'.orr~aq, (~U~,) such zmou~te in a,tdition tn or in lieu of the for~g s.~ ,-nq~r be
i~errnitted from time to time l~v Al~licable I.aye to the extent the* such pa~vmem .
would not result in a d~knlioati~'e recoveTy, a.d 09 the cost of removal
Imptov~nent~ and resto.r, orion of the Prerni.~e.~ to it%pre-existiAg conditiotL
(b) Bring an action, in addition to or in lieu of the action described
subparasraph (a) of this Section, to reenter and regain possession of the ~emises in
the manner provided by the laws ofurdawful detainer of the State of California then in
effect.
Breach a~d Default by City
Section 9.03. All covenants and agreements containcd in this lcasc arc declared to
be both ~venant.~ and conditions to this lease and to the t~t hereby leased to Ci~'.
Should Cil~' fail to perform any covenant, condition, or aereemem contained in this
lease and the default is not cured within 30 days after written notice of the default is
served on City by Compaq, then City shall bc in defatflt trader this lease. In addition
to City'.~ failure to perform any covenant, condition,, ~r eb.¢¢me~t contained !n
leasc~ithi~, the cut, s pe~ieli Is~.....itted b.y thi~ Section.
Cumulative Remedies
Section 9.04. The remedies given to. Compaq in this Article shall not be exclusive
but shall be cumulative with and in additiOn to all remedies now or hereaiter allowed
by law ~d ~bewba-e provided in this lease,
P(;.~/SPLJ-z?,4) t. ] 0 '~g ) 7-0
e2o47573.2,,2'~ e 12..~oo~
Waiver of Breach
Section 9.05. The waivm by Compaq of any breach by City of any of the
provisions of this lease shall not eonsti.'ule a continuing waiver or a waiver of any
subsequent breach by City of either the same or a different provision of this lease,
$un'enck"r of Premises
Section 9.06. On exl~ration or earlier terrmnafion of this lease, Ciw. shall
surrender the Premises and ali Improvements in or on the Prermses ~o Compaq in as
8oocl, sa~e, and clean condition as practicable, reasonabl.- wear and tear exc~.-pted:..
su~ect to Compaq's right to re_~ldre re. movp.1 of'all lrr~rovern~.nts si described m
~ection ~ I 1
Article 10
Option ~o Pur~
Section 10,0l.. Cowt~! hereby grantc to Gib, 0a option to purohasc the Premigo~
on ~he fbllowiug rorer; and conditions:
(a) City may cxo'ci~ this option on or boforc tho end of thc t~rm. of fl~oJeasc, but
not e~xliev than 1 $0 days prior to i,..i o:t.~i,a~on, provided City k not th~ i~ default
under this lease, ky OlSagvt,g o~yow with md by depooiting in escrow at the Cupertino
ofiic~ of tko Fidelity National. Titlo Corapany. a ~PS' of this I~ and ky giving
w¢itto~ notic~ to Compaq.
(bi The tull pureha~ pfioe for tho Pr~ shall be :he sum of one dollar, payable
in ct~sh at ck~.
(o) On-elope of tho o2crow opened by lbo GO'to ~oi~o thig option, Comp~
shall ~onvcy to Ci.'~ good nnd rnafimtable title :o '.h~ P~.uiseo, tn cvid~n~d
£tandard CLTA title in~urane~ polioy issued Sy F~delity National title Compony.
~ubjoot only to ou,.,,t r~al o~t~t~ ta~es a~4 as~s~n~nts.
(d) Ail r~al prop~'ty ta.-e~ levied or mansard against tho l~,¢mis¢$ a~ s~vn by the
latest ~vailable ~an b~ll ~h~ll b~-p~a~at~ baue~ Gi.ty md Compmt on tho bmis of 30-
day monlt~ a~ of 12.'00 z,.id~igbt on the date et'tho elope-of escrow. Any bond0 or
~mprovmnant n~OC~.,¢BtS that cono-titute a lio~ on thc Pterniue~ 0hall, o,,~ tho ol~e of'
z--crow, be a~'~med by
(e) On exercJ0e ofthk option nr.d o~ of the e~o~v for tho sal$ of the
P~','C/SFI,3-27,O t. I(! '~) 21
(J) City sha',l pay the full ~o~t c~, thc.dtle ir~ur-~n~ policy requirod b)' ~is
section, th~ full coc~ of ~g a~ ~il ~ exe~u~ng ~d acknowl~g~g a~y
d~ or other in~nt~ roqdt~ ~ mnv~)' title ~o thg ha,,ises to Ci~
under ~, Docum~n~ Tr~f~ T~ A;~.
(2) Ci~' sMll ~y th~ full ~t ofpr~ng ~ w~l ~ ~u~mg and
ac~owl~g~ng the p~o~ nolo ~d dood of~ roqub~ by ~hi~ ~ction
~.d ~lt a~ ~ay ~ e~t of ~ording thc~ or other ins~mem ~nvc)~ng
tiile ~ the P~emm~ m Oty ~d a~ of r~ordinff die dc~ of ~ r~quired by
~s ~ion.
I (3) Any e~ow t~e c~rg~d by the ~crow holder in ~tion to ~e.c~ of'
, :he ~le ~urance policy req~r~ ~ :his ~ction ~all ~ paid by CiW.
(g) ~cmw for ~v ~of ~e P~mio~ ~all clo~ ~ or befo~ ~x~ ~ys a~ the
~to ~ow is opined by C;W i~ ~ce w~th aubc~on (a~
O~er ~ovisi~
Force Majeure
Section ~I0_Ol. Except as otherwise expressly provided in this lease, if thc
performance of any aci required by this lease to be performed by either Compaq or
City is provented or delayed by reason of any ac~ of God, strike, lockout, labor
trouble, inabilil~- to secure materials, res~ctive governmer, ml laws or regulations, or
any other cause (except financial inability) not the fault oft_he party, required to
perfoisii the ~ the t/nle for perfoii,~krlce of the act w/Il be extended fer a period
equivalent to the period of delay and perfonriance of the act during the.p=riod of delay
will be excused. However, nothing conla/ned in this settlor, shall excuse the prompt
payment of rent by City as required by.this lease or the performance of any ~t
rendered difficult or impossible solely because of the financial condition of the party
required to perform the act
Attorneys' Fees
Section !; .~2.10.02. Should any ii:lgation be commenced between The parties to
d~s lease concerning &e Pren~ises, dlis lease, or thc rights and duties of e~ther in
relation thereto, the party prevailing in that litigation si,all be entitled, in addition to
any other relief that ma}' be granted in the litigation, to a reasonable sum as and for
that party's a~omeya' fees in that litigation that ~all be determined by the court in
that litigation or in a separate ac,ion brought for that purpose.
Notices to Compaq
Section ! !.02~.10_03_ Except as otherwise expressly provided by law, any and all
notices or other communications required or permitted by this lease or by law to be
served on or given to Comvaq by City shall be in writing and shall be cle~rncd duly
served and given when personally delivered to Compaq, to any managing employee of
Compaq, or, in lieu of personal service, when deposited in thc Un~ed Sta~e mail, fa, st-
class postage prepaid, and sent by express mail that allows for Wacking, addi'cssed to
Compa~ at 10400 N. Tautau Avenue, Cupel~no, Califcmia 95014. Com?aq may
change Compaq's address for the purpose of this section by giviag written notice of
that change to City inthe manner provided in Section-l-14~,-, 10.04.
Notices to City
Section 44-,P,4_10.04 Except u otherwise provided by law, aa}' and all notices or
other cos~ummications re, qua:ed or pei-ii/itted.by this leue or by law to be served o~ or
given to Ctt~, by Compaq shall be in writing a~d shall be deemed duly served and
given when personaqly delive~d to Ci~,, any mar, aging employee of City, Or~ m lieu
of personal service, when deposited m the Urated States mail, first-class postage
prepaid, and sent by express mail that allow~ for Iracking, addressed to City at City
Hall, 10300 Tone Avenue, Cuperfiao, California 95014. City rca}: ~hange its ad,tess
for ~te purpose of this section by giving wrir~na notice of that change to Compaq in
the manner provided ir, SecUon 1 t.0; of tki~ lea~c. 10.03.
Governing Law
Sec~on ! ! .~5,10.05. This lease, and all matters relating to this lease, shall be
$ovcrned by the laws of the State of California in force at the time any need fox
interpretation of this lease or any decision or holding concerning this lease arises.
B~ndin$ on Heirs and Successors
$o~tiou:: .~.I0.06. Tl~s l~ shall be binding on and shall in,.u'e m the
of ~c he~rs, executors, adn~is~rstors, successors, ~ usi~ns of the pm~ies hereto,
but r. oflung tn th~s section shall be construed as a consent by Compaq to any
assign, ment of thi~ lease or any interest in the lease by City except as provided in
Article 8 of his lease.
Partial Invalidity
Sect/on t-M~JJl,~ If any provision of this Icase is held by a court of competen~
jurisdiction to be invalid, void, or unenforceable, the remaining provisions of th/s
lease shall remain in full force and effect unimpa,U'ed by the holding.
Sole and Only Agreement
Section I 1.0~. 10.0~. This instrument constitutes the sole and only a~ccmmat
between Compaq and City respecting the Prer/~ses, the leasing of the Premises to
City., the constmcaon of the skate park described in this lease on the Premises, and the
lease terms set forth in this lease, and co~ectly sets forth the obligations of Co~i:oaq
and City m each other as of its date. Any agreements or representat/ons respe, cting the
Premises, their leasing to Cit~' by Compaq, or any other mater discussed in this lease
not expressly set forth iv. this i~strument are n~il.
Tit~ of Essence
Section t-I~.10 09 Time is expressly declared to be of the essence ofth/s lease.
Memorandum of Lea~e with Op~on to lh~rchase for Recording
Section I !.I 9.10.10. Neither Compaq ncr Cily shall record this lease without the
wril~en consent oft. he other. H~wever, Compaq and City shall, at the request of eiiher
a an}' ~ime dunnE the ~ of this lease, execute a memorandum or "sher~ forn~" of
this lease for purposes of, and in a form suitable for, recordation. The memorandum
or ""short form'"' of'J~is lease shall describe the parries, se: forth a description of the
leased Premises, specify the term of this lease, ~l.incorporate this lease by rcfcrencer
and include City's option to pm'chase the Preroise£.
EXECUTED ~ ,2001 at Cupertino, California.
~ ~)ehlwsre e,,",, ,,oration
TI~. ~TY 01~
City. Clerk
June 18th MONTA VISTA PARKING ISSUE Page 1 of 3
Sandra James
'From: Pat Dentinger [pdentinger~mindspring.~om]
Sent: Sunday, June 17, 2001 4:59 PM
To: sjames@cupertino.org
Cc: rlowenthal@cupertino.org; dburnett@cupertino.org; mchang@cupertino.org;
kimberlys~cupertino.org
Subject: June 18th MONTA VISTA PARKING ISSUE
URGENT: JUNE 18, 2001 CITY COUNCIL MEETING TOPIC
Cupertino City Council Members
Re: Neighborhood Parking Issue
MONTA VISTA HIGH SCHOOL WANTS TO CONVERT OUR
NEIGHBORHOOD INTO A HIGH SCHOOL PARKING LOT!!!
We would like to make the following comments and suggestions:
1. SAFETY
Within the past 5 years thc traffic on Presidio and Fort Baker has
become horrific to say the least!!! Cars are dropping off children
at Lincoln Elementary, Monta Vista H.S., and circling around to
access Kennedy Jr. High. Fewer children seem to be able to walk
to school. We have lived here for 30+ years and this was not the
case in the past. Part of the problem may stem from the .fact that
now students in the whole school district may petition Monta Vista
to get in even though they are closer to another school.
CHILDREN LIVING CLOSEST TO MONTA VISTA SHOULD
GO TO MONTA VISTA.
ATTENTION: Statistics for traffic on Presidio done last week
don't reflect a normal school day because they were done after the
3 schools were basicly closed and graduations were over.
2. PROPOSED HIGH SCHOOL PARKING MAKES ADDED
SAFETY FACTOR
If you add High School students in parking spaces in front of
every house on Presidio and Fort Baker, there will be an
INCREASED DANGEROUS SITUATION BECAUSE THERE
6/18/01
June 18th MONTA VISTA PARKING ISSUE Page 2 of 3
WILL BE NOWHERE FOR PARENTS TO PULL IN TO THE
CURgl TO DROP OFF CHILDR~.N. Parents somethxxes park one
or more blocks away to deliver and pick up their children.
ELEMENTARY CHILDREN WALKING TO SCHOOL WILL
BE ENDANGERED BY BLIND SPOTS CREATED BY
ADDITIONAL CONGESTED HIGH SCHOOL CURB
PARKING & MANEUVERING.
3. NUISANCE
We fought this battle in the 1980's when we won Permit Parking.
Now we don't have the graffiti painted on our fences, the litter
and cigarette butts from students is only from students walking
home or sitting on our curbs at various hours during the school
day, students no longer sit on top of their cars and blare loud
music, there is less racing down the streets by students, and we
can now park under our own street trees that we nurtured so we
could park in the shade.
4. PROPOSAL
USE THE PARKING LOT AT BLACKBERRY FARM -700
SPACES!l!
CHARGE A FEE DAILY OR QUARTERLY LIKE THEY DO AT
DEANZA COLLEGE for the parking privilege.
THIS WOULD PAY FOR A PARKING MONITOR IF NEEDED
(as Monta Vista says) AS WELL AS A SHUTTLE BUS FOR
THOSE WHO CAN NOT WALK THE ONE-HALF MILE OR
LESS TO TI-IE HIGH SCHOOL.
ENCOURAGE BIKING!! TAKE SOME LESSONS FROM
PALO ALTO HIGH SCHOOL WHERE TI-W.Y HAVE A VERY
SUCCESSFUL PROGRAM.
Thank you for your attention.
Fredric and Patricia Dentinger
New Haven Ct. at comer of Presidio
Cc: Sandra James
6/18/O 1
June 18th MONTA VISTA PARKING ISSUE Page 3 of 3
Richard Lowenthal
Don Bm¥1ett
Michael Chang
Kimberly Smith, City Clerk
6/18/01
Sandra James
From: Kelly Kendle [kkendle4?~home.com]
Sent: Thursday, June 14~ 2001 7:08 PM
To: 'James, Mayor Sandra o sjames@cupertino.org'
Subject: NEW PARKING PROPOSAL FROM MVHS
Importance: High
MV~c11~0g
Madam Mayor,
Last evening as I arrived home from work, a Monta Vista High School student
was making his rounds on our street - Noonan Court. He gave me a flyer
regarding the neighborhood student parking proposal they are going bring to
the City Council. This flyer now indicates in bold letters that the
program is "PURELY VOLUNTARY". This was never clear in previous
communications and was side stepped in meetings. I think FUHSD realizes
the mistake they made in suggesting that it be mandatory.
Given that the program will be voluntary, I don't believe the city needs to
be'involved at all. Every neighbor that has permit parking, has two guest
permits. If that resident chooses to volunteer for the school's program,
they can surrender/loan one guest permit to the high school. So the
current permit process already accommodates the voluntary process - the
council does not need to take any action - the district does not need to
propose anything to the council.
Further, the proposal for permit parking on Imperial Avenue needs to be
approved - so that they can get relief from inundation of student parking
(see attached pictures) and so that they can participate in the voluntary
program.
Finally, all the neighbors need to work with FUHSD to come up with a long
term solution. I think your suggestion regarding the use of Blackberry
Farm is an excellent direction. It is my view that the streets surrounding
Blackberry Farm would need controlled parking to ensure the use of the
Blackberry Farm parking.lot.
Thanks again for being open minded on the serious traffic and parking
conditions in the Monta Vista High School neighborhood.
Kelly Kendle
21746 Noonan Court
kkendle47@home.com
kelly_kendle@agilent.com
Sandra James
From: Kelly Kendle [kkendle47~home.com]
Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2001 7:08 PM
TO: 'James, Mayor Sandra - sjames~icupertino.org'
Subject: NEW PARKING PROPOSAL FROM MVHS
Importance: High
M~ClS4~ MV~c12J~ M~c11J~
Madam Mayor,
Last evening as I arrived home from work, a Monta Vista High School student
was making his rounds on our street - Noonan Court. He gave me a flyer
regarding the neighborhood student parking proposal they are going bring to
the City Council. This flyer now indicates in bold letters that the
program is "PURELY VOLUNTARY". This was never clear in previous
communications and was side stepped in meetings. I think FUHSD realizes
the mistake they made in suggesting that it be mandatory.
Given that the program will be voluntary, I don't believe the city needs to
be involved at all. Every neighbor that has permit parking, has two guest
permits. If that resident chooses to volunteer for the school's program,
they can surrender/loan one guest permit to the high school. So the
current permit process already accommodates the voluntary process - the
council does not need to take any action - the district does not need to
propose anything to the council.
Further, the proposal for permit parking on Imperial Avenue needs to be
approved - so that they can get relief from inundation of student parking
(see attached pictures) and so that they can participate in the voluntary
program.
Finally, ~11 the neighbors need to work with FUHSD to come up with a long
term solution. I think your suggestion regarding the use of Blackberry
Farm is an excellent direction. It is my view that the streets surrounding
Blackberry Farm would need controlled parking to ensure the use of the
Blackberry Farm parking lot.
Thanks again for being open minded on the serious traffic and parking
conditions in the Monta Vista High School neighborhood.
Kelly Kendle
21746 Noonan Court
kkendle47@home.com
kelly_kendle@agilent.com
Page 1 of 1
file://C:\WINNTkVrofiles~sjames\Temporary Interact Files\OLKSkMVtrfcl2.jpg 6/18/01
Page 1 of 1
file://C:\~files\sjames\Temporary Internet Files\OLK.5~VlVtrfc 1 l.jpg 6/18/01
Survey of Pilot Program
from .Dolores Ave Residents
,..:~',':'. ~&~..,.~.:.;~,~;~.;:¥~ ~
Tot~ 19 houses on Dolores Ave: -.', ~, - ;--
~ Ag~nst ~e pilot progrm; 15 'r~: · -~ '~ '~ '~
(Silent Majority) '; - 2-
· O LOve the pilot ~ogr~: 2 ~ , ~ ~ ~. , -
~ No r~sponse: 2 -'
This pilot p'rggram is NOT that wonderful as you have heard !
Mid-Pen Open Space
, Fremont Older~
Stevens Creek Co. Park
Trail Connection -' ~' Canyon Heian~s
* ~ 1-- Academy
-- -- ~ ~ Lower Stevens Creek Park
~, & Parking Lot
Abandonea - ~ Access Rd.
Rock Quar~
Lind~ V~ Drive ~ Park -
Acc~.Rd.
-" ep Cliff ,
- Golf Course
Monte Vista H.S '- ~ -- ~ * ~:' " '' ' '~'
Athletic Fields ~ -.~"~ ~ ~-.~ -
Canyon Heights Academy
BENEFITS
Academically excellent private education to augment
Cupertino's outstanding school system
Alternative educational choice for the development
of tomorrow's leaders
Public-private partnership
· Environmental programs · Road improvements
· Educational programs · Vital trail link
· Shared facilities
Environmental sensitivity · Clustering of facilities on previously quarried land
· Maximize retention of open space
· Protection of creek and wetlands
· Revegetation program within abandoned quarry area
"1 Commuted by Bike" Entry Card
Cupert, lno l~ike-To-Work Week
May 13-19, 2001
rode my bicycle to, from or through Cupertino on May
~, 2001 to [] Work, [] School or to run [] Errands in
the City of , for a total round trip of
miles. Please enter my name in the drawing for bike-
related prizes that will be held atthe conclusion of BTWW. You don'~
need to be preeen~ to win, bul; be sure to mail thi~ Card by Monday,
May 21, 2001.
· Name: Phone:
Home address ZIP code is: . Name of my destintion
(employer, school, etc.)
· J. IBIHX3
Cupertino 2001 Bike-to-Work Week Statistics
Thanks to: Cycle Commute Cupertino card count:
For Moms, Bikes, & Apple Pie event: Total number of cyclists 254
Specialized Custom water bottles Total number of cards (one per day) 420
Layout and printing of fliers
for CUSD schools By purpose.. By destination:
Safe Moves Bike safety rodeo Work 200 Compaq 52
DeAnza Optimists Club Fun bike obstacle course School 11 HP 45
Calabazas Bike Shop Free bike inspections Errands 25 Apple 40
Cupertino Bike Shop Use of tables W,E 13 Bike Expo 13
Almaden Cycle Lots of food at "rest stop" W,E 4 Lincoln School 7
Touring Club W,S 1 Cupertino 4
Marie Callender's 5 apple pie gift certificates 254 Agilent 4
Altreans, VTA, For being there .........
& FOSCT
Days i~.;;~, I~d: Miles for week:
For Cycle Cmnmute Cupertino prizes: 7 3 150 2
Bicycle Outfitter 2 $80 tuneups 6 6 100-149 13
Calabazas Bike Shop 5 $20 gift certificates 5 8 50-99 28
Chain Reaction Bicycles2 $25 gift certificates ' 4 23 25-49 35
- Cupertino Bike Shop 3 $20 gift certificates 3 11 10-24 70
2 t-shirts 2 29 0-10 100
Pale Alto Bicycles 1 $65 tuneup 1 175
Stan's Bicycle Store 2 $70 tuneups
Walt's Cycle & Fitness 3 Avenir R Flashing Lights By hem cit~. By de~tinetlen clt~,
Wheel Away 2 $25 gift certificates Cupertino 90 Cupertino 189
Cycle Center San Jose 57 Santa Clare 10
8 bike shops 22 prizes Sunnyvale 22 Sunnyvale 10
Santa Clara 20 San Jose 9
For BnerBIzer 8ration: Mountain View 15 Mountain View 8
Hobee's 1 sheet of coffee cake Campbell 13 Pale Alto 8
Coffee Society Pot of 20 cups of coffee .................
Employer Results:
Expense Report: Compaq Computer 52/3000 = 1.7%
BTWW banner 870.91 HP 45/3000 ---- 1.5%
Printing flyers, cards, & guides 712.13 Apple 40/3160 = 1.3%
Frame for proclamation 16.78
30 buttons 19.48 City of Cupertino 4/147 = 2.7%
Coffee for Moms, Bikes... 45.00
2 portapotties for" 291.60 Quinlen E.ergizer ~tatimt Cyclist C4unt:
Business Reply Mail postage 60.00 Total Stopped
Engraving on plaque 32.40 Northbound 57 31
2048.30 Southbound 36 13
CUPERTINO BIKE-TO-WORK WEEK 2001 PRIZE WINNERS
"1 Commuted by Bike" Entry Cards
May 13-19, 2001
Key: W/S/E = Work, School, or Errand
Mileage
5113 5114 5115 5116 5117 5118 5119WlSIE City First Last Name Phone Home Zip Destination Prize
12 W Cupertino Bruce Bailey 408/285-7171 95014 Compaq Calabazas: $20 GC
21 21 21 21 W Santa Clara Bill Cox 408-996-9752 95014 WhereNet Inc Calabazas: $20 GC
7 14 E Santa Clara Sumion Leifer 408-366-2532 95014 Intel? Calabazas: $20 GC
2 W Cupertino Jeffrey Martin 4081285-1417 95014 Compaq Calabazas: $20 GC
22 22 22 22 22 W San Jose Phil Tracey 408-257-4156 95014 Kaiser Electronics Calabazas: $20 GC
24 24 W Cupertino Mary Cadloni 408-973-8348 95014 5300 Stvs Crk Blvd Chain Reaction: $25 GC
5 6 3 9 E LA Jim Limberatos 408-252-1166 95014 asst errands Chain Reaction: $25 GC
2 W Cupertino Henri Berger 408-974-3184 95014 Apple Cupertino: $20 GC
5 10 W,E Cupertino Yvonne Thorstenson 408-777-0104 95014 Stanford, Bike Expo Cupertino: $20 GC
6 3 6 6 S Cupertino Katrin Wheeler 408-253-8805 95014 Lincoln School Cupertino: $20 GC
3 25 3 21 8 6 E PA,Stga,SC,e Margaret Limberatos 408-252-1166 95014 asst errands Cupertino: t-shirt
4 E Cupertino Mike Wilkens 408-737-3980 95014 shopping, PO Cupertino: t-shirt
·16 W Cupertino Ben Colbom 650-967-4807 94040 Sun PA Bicycles: tuneup ($65)
22 22 22 22 22 W San Jose Bert Nelson 408-257-6814 95014 Globalstar Stan's: tuneup ($70)
4 4 3 3 S Cupertino Marc Wheeler 408-253-8805 95014 Lincoln School Stan's: tuneup ($70)
14 W Cupertino Gary Maxey 408/285-1543 94024 Compaq TBO: tuneup ($80)
16 W Cupertino Bill Snow 408/285-5216 94041 Compaq TBO: tuneup ($80)
18 W Cupertino Rick Blackman 408/748-1894 95054 Compaq Walt's: flashing light
16 W Cupertino Scott Davis 408-447-5305 95051 HP Walt's: flashing light
?? ?? ?? ?? W Cupertino Ron Williams 408/285-5542 95126 Compaq Walt's: flashing light
16 W Santa Clara Greg Azevedo 408-553-7134 95008 Agilent Technologies Wheelaway: $25 GC
14 W Cupertino Nancy Zink 408-866-2660 95130 Apple Wheelaway: $25 GC
CITY OF CUPERT'J:NO
MRY 13 19, 001
BEAT THE TRAFI='J:¢ A EN~TO¥ THE RZDE
Complete and mail one "Z . Commuted by Bike" Entry
Card for each.day you r~de your bike to.. from .or
t~rough Cupertino to work, school or shopp,ng dur,ng
B:ke-To-Work Week - May 15 - 19. 2001.
Vou will be eligible to win valuable bike-related
prize in a drawing sponsored by the City of
Cupertino's Bicycle Pedestrian Advisory Committee.
See details on the reverse side.
HAVE A 6REAT R/DE
For more Entry Cards call:
Anne Ng - Bike-To-Work Week Program Director
Cupertino Bicycle/Pedestrian Advisory Committee
(408) 257-6506
CITY OF
CUPERTINO
May 1, 2001
For additional information contact:
Anne Ng - Program Director
Cycle Commute Cupertino
(408) 257-6506
(Fax) 366-2606
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASES
Bicycle Commuting Pays Off In Cupertinol
Cycle Commute Cupertino offers bicyclists that ride to, from, or through
Cupertino during Bike-to-Work-Week an opportunity to win bike-related prizes
from area bike shops. If you bicycle to work or school, or use your bike to run
errands during this seven-day period beginning Sunday, May 13~ you are
eligible to participate in the drawing.
Just fill out one '1 Commuted by Bike' Entry Card on the front of this display
stand for each day during Bike-to-Work Week that you use your bicycle for
commuting or utility purposes, and drop it in the mail. All postage paid entry
cards should be cempleted and mailed to Cupertino City Hall by Monday, May
21, 2001.
City Council Members and bicycle advocates Don Bumett and Richard
Lowenthal will conduct the drawing for prizewinners at noon on Friday, May 25~
at Cupertino City Hall. Information gathered from entry cards will be used to
study bicycle-commuting demographics as called for by Cupertino's Bicycle
Transportation Plan. Ail info,.ation received will be regarded as confidential,
and used only for the purpose of the study and the awarding of prizes to
participating riders.
Printed on Recycled Paper
I
: ' For additional information contact:
' Anne Ng 408/257-6506 or
! ~Toe Walton 408/996-7861
CUPE~INO'
Mom, Apple Pie
Bicycles
Bring Mom to Cupertino's Bike-to-Wo~k
Week kickoff event at City Hall on
Mother's bay f~om 9:00 a.m. to noon
Sunday, May 13, 2001
This is an opportunity for the whole
family to gather information about
getting to work or school by bike, and
using your bike to run errands. We
promise fun for all!
Safe Moves will present a Bike ,,<a£efy Rodeo, and the De Anza
Optimists Club will challenge riders to pedal a B/cycle Obsfac/e
~ou/'~. Almaden ~'~cle Touring Club will provide food and drink,
Marie Callender's apple pies will be raffled and cyclists will receive
Specialized water bottles.
Event sponsors and guests include: Silicon Valley Bicycle Coalition,
FLTDES for Bay Area .Commuters, Valley Transportation Authority,
Traffic Safe Communities Network, area biCycle dealers and the
Bicycle Pedestrian Adviser Committee for the City of Cupertino.
City Hall lesated at Toeee and Rodriques Avenues one block east of De Anza Blvd.
Printed on Recycled Paper
I I I ! I I I I I ] I I I I I I I I I
Stevens Canyon Residents Association
www.stevenscanyon, corn
JJJJJ.lJJ
I I I I I I I ] I I I I I I I I I } I
Vil~AV~ ..... ....... I~' c' ! I ] ' .tml~ ~ /~ ~ I
Stevens ,.,anvon;
_.,,.~ .'m_ l~'~ ~mm~~ : ~ ~..~ .. ~ ~ ...................... r"" 'F".~
Area ..........
~: ........ ~s" '"'";-'~ .......... ' ...... . .~ .............. ~-.'
· ' ~ ~;" i ~: '".~
..-' _'..
~a~ ~;.. E, .~ ;:.. '".-.~ ..... . ........ .:.' . ~ ........
,~ · · ...~-.---.~ -
~ ".~ ~':' .. "'.- ~~ · ~ ~,~r~ .....
.
......
'"... "_._~ ~d; ...... ,..-~, ,:' ~ ~ ' ,' ...'~
........................
-
Lind~Vl~ j ~ E ~ '-' ..._~-_
Canyon Heights .'~' ~,-.~ ~"~"~'"
Academy ' ~'"
~ ~ - .~...~
"
· ~ ;~--q"°. ~' , ......
; ~?:~ ..... .,.....~ ..
Stevens Creek Dam
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
Residents' Concerns
· Conflict with land use policies in the General Plan.
· Substantial increase in traffic in relation to the existing traffic
load and street capacity.
· Degradation of public services including fire and police,
resulting in inadequate emergency access.
· Degradation to the air quality in the area due to increased auto
traffic.
· Degradation of existing visual character.
· Damage to scenic resources including native oak trees and the
riparian corridor flora and fauna along Stevens Creek.
* Exposure of neighboring residents to excessive noise levels,
including an increase in the ambient noise levels in the project
vicinity.
· Increased taxation to pay for additional municipal service loads.
I I I I I I I I I I ! I I I I I i I I
Stevens Creek Residents Association's
Recommendation
Cupertino already has a great public school system that all
children in the city can attend. There is no compelling need to
warrant such a radical departure from Cupertino's General Plan as
the Academy has requested.
We urge the Council to give strong direction to the applicant that
even though this project has good intentions,
· It is an entirely inappropriate land use
· It is conflict with the intent of Cupertino's General Plan.
· It would generate seemingly insurmountable traffic, noise ~
and environmental problems. .j
DESK ITEMS
THE FOLLOWING WERE RECEIVED
AFTER THE PACKET WAS
PRINTED:
David Knapp
From.' Carol Atwood
Sent.' Thursday, June 14, 2001 4:31 PM
To: David Knapp; Ralph Quails
Subject: FW: 3 Million Dollars Eliminated from City Budget for New Library
For your information
..... Original Message .....
From: vtamcupt@aol.com [mailto:vtamcupt@aol.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2001 9:15 PM
To: SJames@cupertino.org
CC: Mchang@cupertino.org; rlowenthal@cupertino.org;
Dburnett@cupertino.org; carola@¢upertino.org
Subject: 3 Million Dollars Eliminated from City Budget for New Library
Subject: 3 Million Dollars Eliminated from City Budget for New Library
Council Members,
This is a letter of protest. I read with chagrin the article in the
Cupertino Courier by Kevin Fayle regarding the City of Cupertino Budget.
1. As June 4, 2001 has passed there is only one opportunity on June 18, 2001
to discuss how the available money in the budget will be spent. If one was
on vacation one would have missed the discussion. The powers that be knew
that this issue was coming up and to only give two meetings to it is as
though they are saying that "It is a done deal." I realize what the rules
are, but this is a significant item, and I feel that the public should be
more involved.
2. We have needed and waited for a larger library for a long time and we
deserve to have adequate square footage in one building, not throughout the
city center.'
3. As we waited, Quinlan Center was built, A perfectly good Senior Center,
although a little small, was torn down and rebuilt, 'and a new fire station
was built with all the comforts possible.
4. Now we are told, after our long wait, that our library must be smaller
due to lack of funds. Libraries are the knowledge base of the community and
are known for their varied resources so important for the education of all
ages. They can inspire children who otherwise would never have a book to
read. 60,000 square feet is the square footage needed to provide the
necessary library services, and it is my opinion that the remodeling of the
sports center should be delayed until we are more solvent, and that the
library should receive the 22 million as planned- not 19 million.
Thank you for your consideration of this request.
Sincerely yours,
Virginia Tamblyn
19721 Bixby Drive
Cupertino, CA 95014
408-253-2278
vtamcupt@aol.com
Mayor Sandra L. James ~
Vice-Mayor Richard Lowenthal I
Council Member Don Burnett ? IJ
Council Member Michael Chang JUN 1 8 2001
From: W.A. Griffin
21838 Shattuck Ddve CUPERTINO CITY CLERK
Cupertino, CA 95014
Re: High School Parking Proposal
Dear Members of the Council:
We've lived in this wonderful city since 1959, and at Shattuck Drive since 1972.
We would have never expected the need for a dissenting letter be sent to our
Council in order to retain the use of the street fronting our home. Our concerns
are as follows:
1) Where do we tell relatives, friends and service people to park?
2) Each street will look like a parking loft! Not acceptable!!
3) Occasionally I park on the street; now, what will I dO?
4) The amount of traffic will increase, so will the noise level and auto
exhaust fumes. Is this fair to us?
Signed:
W.A. Griffin
Kimbedy Smith
From: James Ma [zjma(~hotmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2001 6:15 PM
To: kimberlys~}cupertino.org
Cc: zjma@hotmail.com
Subject: Opposition to the student-parking proposal around Monta Vista School
Dear City Clerk,
> We are writing to you to express my strong opposition
>to the student-parking proposal for the residents near and
>around Monta Vista High School. The plan is to extend the
>existing "Pilot Program" to my street i.e. Orange Ave..
> I would be very concerned about the safety of
>students as well as my family members, especially my two
>little kids. My street is very crowed and narrow. Parking
>more cars on the street will definitely block out all the
>necessary traffic views when I back up my car from my garage.
>This situation is getting even worse in the early
>morning when lots of students are walking on the streets.
>
> We purchased this Orange house at a extremely high
>price lasy year for one simple reason: Letting our kids
>walk to the Monta Vista High School in the future. I don't
>understand why other people should share the convenience
>without even paying for the price. We like to help out the
>school parking problems in a reasonable ways. City and school
>board cannot just force issue here without consulting with
>the residents here.
>
> We are asking the City and school to come up with
>some practical plans which will ultimately improve the school
>parking situations there. These may include building more parking
>space on campus, car-pool, school shuttles, and so on. We
>also like to see Cupertino city to allocate some funding
>for the school parking project.
>
>
> Thank you very much!
>
>
> Mr. James Ma
> Ms. Suyi Peng
· > Jack Ma and Justin Ma
> @ 10420 Orange Ave.
>
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
Kimberly Smith
From: Nevshim-7-~aol.corn
Sent: Friday, June 15, 2001 7:25 PM
To: sjarnes~upertino.org; rlowenthal~cupertino.org; dbumett~cupertino.org;
rncb.ang~cupertino.org; kimberlys~.upertino.org
Cc: "joe hamilton"~uhsd.org; gene_longinetti~ifuhsd.org; joanne_laird~fuhsd.org;
ford~ricoc, het.net; susan_camilleri~hotmail.~om
Subje,:t: (no subject)
Dear Sir or Madam:
I refer to the flyer that was sent out by the Monta Vista Parking Task Force regarding
the "Voluntary' Parking Pilot Program which will be considered by the City Council during
their meeting of Monday, June 18th, 2001.
I oppose this program for two reasons. First, there is underlying coercion in this
program. The City Council has expressed in prior council meetings that if the residents of
the affected streets do not approve the Pilot Program, then the City Council will vote to
have such streets currently marked as "Permit Parking' for residents, to be opened to the
public so that students may park during school hours.
Secondly, I am opposed to Monta Vista's use of my neighborhood as a parking lot for its
student drivers. The traffic on Fort Baker, every morning and afternoon is much like the
loading and unloading zone of an airport, with one row of cars stopped to drop off
students and another row waiting to take their turn, on both sides of the street. In the
midst of the congestion, drivers recklessly make U-turns in the middle of the street where
students are crossing! Are we going to add student drivers to this already chaotic mess ?
I moved to this neighborhood to be close to the schools, so that my children can walk to
Lincoln and Kennedy Middle School. By allowing student drivers to park on my street, there
will be increased congestion, and reduced visibility of pedestrians, particularly small
children. My children will have to navigate streets crowded with cars driven by teenage
drivers. The afternoon pick-up, when Monta Vista and Lincoln both let out at 3pm, will be
the most dangerous time of day. The incidence of traffic accidents, bodily injury and
property damage will increase during these peak hours. I certainly hope that Monta Vista
has given thought to increasing their insurance policy to cover claims brought against the
school by aggrieved parties.
I am putting Monta Vista and the City Council on notice that if my child is injured in any
traffic accident, directly attributable to the unsafe street conditions created by this
Program, that I hold Monta Vista and the City completely responsible. The fact that this
program is involuntary will further bolster my position that the City and Monta Vista
should be held liable for creating the unsafe conditions on these streets against the
wishes of the neighborhood residents. I urge the City Council to vote against the
implementation of the Pilot Parking Program.
Evelyn Shimazaki
910 Fort Baker Dr.
Page 1 of 1
Kimberly Smith
From: Nevshimazal~aol.com -
Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2001 12:31 AM
To: dbumettl~cupertino.org
Cc: kimbedys~icupertino.org; Joe_hamilton~uhsd.org
Subject: Re: Parking Near Monta Vista High
To Council Member Don Bumett
We live on Fort Baker Drive, just outside the back gate of Monta Vista High.
Each morning and afternoon of eve .ry school day, our street resembles the
loading and unloading zone at a major airport, with one row of cars pulled to
the side to drop off or pick up students, and another mw of cars along side
them waiting their turn. AJI the while, students weave among the cars to get
to the gate. Just as at the airport, we suffer congestion, noise, pollution,
and safety issues.
At any major airport in the US confronted with a similar situation, sound
management and common sense would dictate a strict NO PARKING policy, with a
familiar sign such as:
'q'his Zone Is For Passenger Loading And Unloading Only. NO PARKING."
The proposal to permit student parking on Fort Baker flies in the face of
sound management and common sense. It is akin to puffing long term parking
in the loading zone of an airport. I urge you to show your common sense and
your sound managerial judgment by rejecting the proposal to tum our streets,
· which already bears the burden of being a majoring loading and unloading
zone, into a long-term parking lot as well.
Thank you for your attention.
Naoki Shimazaki
910 Fort Baker Drive
Cupertino CA 95014
6/14/01
.. fA VISTA PAEKING ISSUE
Klmberly Smith
From: Pat Dentinger [pdentinger~imindspring:c°m] ....
Sent: Sunday. June 17. 2001 6:59 PM
To: sjamest~cupertino.org
Cc: rlowenthall~cupertino.org; dbumett~cupertino.org; mchangQcupertino.org;
klmberlye~cupertino.org
Subject: June 18th MONTA VISTA PARKING ISSUE
URGENT: JUNE 18, 2001 CITY COUNCIL IVIF~ET~G TOPIC
Cupertino City Council Members
Re: Neighborhood Parking Issue
MONTA VISTA HIGH SCHOOL WANTS TO CONVERT OUR
NEIGHBORHOOD INTO A HIGH SCHOOL PARKING LOT!!!
We would like to make the following comments and suggestions:
1. SAFETY
Within the past 5 years the traffic on Presidio and Fort Baker has
become hordfic to say the least!!! Cars are dropping off children
at Lincoln Elementary, Monta Vista H.S., and circling around to
access Kennedy Jr. High. Fewer children seem to be able to walk
to school. We have lived here for 30+ years and this was not the
case in the past. Part of the problem may stem from the fact that
now Stllfl0nts in the whole scho.ol dlstx~ct II~y petition M0nta Vista
to get in even though they fire
closer to another school.
CHILDRFN LIVINO CLOSEST TO MONTA VIgTA SHOULD
GO TO MONTA VISTA.
ATTENTION: Statistics for traffic on Presidio done last week
don't reflect a normal school day because they were done after the
3 schools were basicly closed and graduations were over.
2., PROPOSED HIGH SCHOOL PARKING MAKES ADDED
SAFETY FACTOR
If you add High School students in parking spaces in front of
every house on Presidio and Fort Baker, there will be an
INCRF. ASED DANGEROUS SITUATION BECAUSE THERI~.
6/18/01
......... o,a:~ ~w. ONTA VISTA PARKING ISSUE
WILL BE NOWHERE FOR PARENTS TO PULL IN TO
CURB TO DROP OFF CHILDREN. Parents sometimes pa,
or more blocks away to deliver and pick up their chila-
ELEMENTARY CHILDREN WAL~q '~O e' .._..._-
BE ENDANQER~D ~x/I~LIND
ADDITIONAL CONOESTED
PARKINO &
3. NUISM'w''
We ~-'
TI
LE,
ENC
PAL(.
SUCC
Thank y
Fredric a~
New Havt
Cc: Sandra
6/18/01
Kimberly Smith
From: Don Oestreicher [doestreicher~cytoldnetics.com]
Sent: Monday, June 18, 2001 3:52 PM
To: 'kimberlys~icuperfino.org' . _.
Subject: AGENDA ITEM 20: Monta Vista High School Student ParKing I-ilot Pro gram
Cupertino City Clerk:
Please put in the packet for today's meeting...
CUPERTINO CITY COUNCIL - REGULAR MEETING
AGENDA ITEM 20: Monta Vista High School Student Parking Pilot Program.
Monday, June 18, 2001
I am opposed to the Monta Vista High School Student Parking Pilot Program.
This program will have significant health and safety impact on Cupertino
school children and other residents.
This program has not received sufficient community input and alternatives
have not been carefully considered.
Rather than rehash this complex issue, I want to focus on one facet of the
Monta Vista High School Student Parking Pilot Program to highlight the
dangers of insufficient community input.
This example is necessarily the most critical, but just a representative
one.
Let's consider the proposal to have student parking near the corner of Fort
Baker Drive and Presidio Drive. (I live near this corner on Old Town Court.)
This corner is:
A major automobile drop-off point for Monta Vista high school students
A primary pedestrian access for Monta Vista High School students who live
south of the school
A primary pedestrian access for Lincoln Elementary School students who live
south of the school
A primary pedestrian access for Kennedy Middle School students who live
north of the school
This is the last place anyone should encourage additional parked cars which
will:
Narrow the street,
Reduce visibility, and
Increase traffic flow.
This corner, with a painted crosswalk offering the illusion of safety, is an
accident waiting to happen.
None of this is new to the Cupertino City Council. Cupertino has taken
several actions to mitigate this dangerous situation.
You have installed raised cement lane dividers on this corner.
You have restricted parking in the vicinity of this corner.
You have installed 'speed bumps on Presidio leading to this corner.
With all this history, I can not imagine how you would now consider the
Pilot Program as proposed.
I request that reject the current proposal and request better proposal based
more community input.
Thank you for your time,
Dear Council Members and FUHSD Trustees,
We have been a resident at 10902 Wilkinson Ave. s'mce July 2000. The reasons we were
attracted to ti~i.~ neighborhood were the school system, beauty, friendliness and safety.
When we were lookin~o for a home, we wanted to live in an area, which would serve as a
safe place to bring up our 2 daughters, lVie~sa is S years old and Ruri is 6 years old. We
observed msny children were walking home from school on our calm street.
Ou~ biggest concern with the introduction of the expanded pilot program parking of high
school children in front of our home is the incre~ traffic this will cause as well as
hinder visibility from our driveway, which is on a bend.
Daily I observe the high school students goln~ to lunch and sometimes they are in a rush
to get back and have a tendency to drive faster than normsL This could result in
accidents, which could have been avoided. Other parents in the neighborhood are also
concerned with this and will bc forced to drive their children to school, furth~
exasperating thc traffic problem. The safety of our children is paramount and because th~
school district l~s not planned for thc parking of high school stud~ cars, this should not
be imposed on the residents surrounding the school. Alternative parking areas i.e.
Blackl~,y Fa,~s or parking on the school grounds should be considered.
Why would the city COlIB0Il want tO ~ the potential for accidents by allowing
students to park on a wider, offe~mpus, scale. This will only increase the probability of
accidents to happen. If only one child gets hurt or even killed due to this new policy then
all ofns will have to live with the guilt and memory ofthe decision being made by the
council. My family and I would like the City Council to strongly reconsider their
position on this matter and avoid any future disasters.
~ ~m mailing this card to inform you tbet Z Qm ~inst the Monl~ Vista High School proposal to
m~ke our neighborhood into a school perking lot. This plan raises troffic congestion, safety and
~nforcement issues, as well as r~quiring disclosure when we s~ll our home. The r~sicl~nts should
not hove to be~r the odditioml odvors~ burden of providing parking for Monto Vista High School
in addition to being the primary route f~r parents and students K - 12 g~tting 1~ the thre~
n~ighberhnad schools. Fremont UnJm High School District needs to Dian fo~. txqovide and
~4zulote o~-com,us ~rking ~ not delegate tlmt duty t~ the neighbors. ~. number of us
are willing to assist in investigating alternative solutions.
Taxpayers and voters fighting to rmint~in the quality of life in Cupertino,
$ignotur~ ~.ddr~so
Printed nan~ Cumrn~nts
Editor
Cupertino Courier
De~r Sir,
I/hlle ! found the lead story on the co-operat/ou of the cit~ vith the bus/ness ochers,
& tho developer, (June 13th issue), interesting, the priority given this, over the
hearthS8 on the Canyqin lte~ghts Aeedomy, leaves me concerned about your priorities.
· he prime concern, by survey of the general population, is traffic. Yet this devel-
opment can only exacerbate an already serious situation on Stevens Canyon Rd., due
to the trucks.
· The only access to this site is on a blind curve. This development ~ould pour hundreds
o£ vehicles, many driven by teenaserss onto a road presently carry/nE up to 3§0 trucks
an hours plus many cars from Hontebello Rd., Saratoga, and beyond. A~td recreation,
and hea~ bicycle traffics and you have a predictable receipe for disaster.
This doesn't touch on the impact on the present ne/~hbors. Some o£ whom are 2nd gen-
eration residents. Doesn't address the impact on dovn stream residents, at least as
~ar as Stevens Creek Blvd. Doesn*t concider whether a school should be situated
below a dom, with a knou earthEuake fault under it. Doesnet mention the impact this
~ould have on the proposed creekside trail.
This, & more cannot be explored herep due to space limitations. Yet this only rated
3" bottom of page
I/hat think/ng created the priority relegatinE so important au issue to the connunity
to a footnote,' ~rhLle elevatin~ storaEe 8pace to the lead front p~e article? Does
human interest euperceed c~unity best interest?
! am pleased for the business owners, but come ON!
David Knapp
From: RandMSchwartz@aol.com
Sent: Monday. June 18, 2001 2:54 PM
To: sJa.mes~_cupertino.org; ri.owenthal@cupertino.org; dbumett@cupertino.org;
mcnang~cupertino.org; oavek@cupertino.org
Subject: Private School at Stevens Canyon Road being considered on June 18
To the Cupertino City Council and City Manager:
As a 24-year resident of Cupertino, I would like to express my concern over
the proposal to build the Canyon Heights Academy on Stevens Canyon Road. I
am particularly worried about the impact that this construction will have on
traffic congestion along Foothill Blvd and Stevens Canyon Road, which has
· become increasingly crowded. This, in turn, leads to additional traffic
hazards.
I hope that you will consider my objections in making your decision.
Thank you for your attention.
Sincerely,
Roberta B. Schwartz
22204 Via Camino Ct.
Cupertino
Phone (408) 739-5529
~-18-2~1 2:22PM ;ROM
P.O. Bo~ 20~6, Cupefli~o, CA 9501 $o2066, Phon~: (&50) 691-5583. Fex: (650) 691-5295
The ~on~blc ~or S~ k ~m~
~b~s of ~o Ci~ Co. oil
10300 To~e Avenu~
~o, CA 95014-3202
F~: (408) 777-3223
J~e 17, 2001
~ ~or ~d Co~ci~
We are wr/t/ng to you to oppose thc development plan of the Canyons Heights
Academy.
The traffic brought by a school on Stevens Canyons Road will definitely further
cause severe environmental impact and irreversible health hazards to the area that has
long suffered from the diesel fume from hundreds of huge tracks zipping through on the
daily basis.
Will the narrowness of the Foothill Blvd. and Stevens Canyon Road be in the
best interests of the studeots? The location is the worst choice fora private school
which is absolutely no need in our neighborhood wh~re internationally well-known
schools are readily available to our children. One must ask who are the developers
trying to build a school for. Obviously, not for us? Why should the City of Cupertino
allow such a tax-exempted enterprise to brutally invade our Lives?
We are pleading for your good senses and leadership in rejecting the application
of this building pwposal.
Sinc.orely,~... ~ , /"
Ignatius Y. Ding and Josephind, C. Ding
10397 Aveaida Lane
Cupertino, CA 95014-3946
Ignatius_Ding_2000i~jahoo.com
Jiswei~ljuno.com
Kimberly Smith
From: Stephen Faust [SteveFaustOhome.com]
$®nt: Monday, June 18, 2001 4:31 PM
To: Smith, Kimbedy
Subject: Canyon Heights Academy .
Dear City Council Members,
I am writing you as a 28 year resident of the City of Cupertino to
express my strong opposition to the proposed Canyon Heights Academy
project. Although this project may be an admirable cause, it is
entirely inappropriate for its proposed site for many reasons, not the
least of which are the following:
1. Inappropriate Land Use: Residents in this area have built or
purchased their homes relying on the current zoning and conformity with
the General Plan. Prior thoughtful Councils approved this zoning and
General Plan after significant study, review and public input. Surely
they would have not have issued these zoning designations contemplating
that they would be modified to accommodate another use. To do so at
this time would not only be inappropriate but unfair to those residents
who have relied upon the zoning and General Plan. Also, reportedly the
developer has observed that Los Gatos or Saratoga would never approve a
project such as the academy but that Cupertino is viewed as more
flexible. I would hope that this is not the case.
2. TRAFFIC: Stevens Canyon Road, the only access to the proposed site,
has become a very busy and dangerous roadway. Not only does it service
local traffic, including a massive numbers of huge quarry trucks, but it
is increasingly used by commuters traveling to and from work from as far
away as Boulder Creek and such environs. A rudimentary analysis of the
situation indicates that major changes to the entrance of the project
would be required including: additional traffic lanes, turning lanes and
most likely a signal light. The implications for traffic flow on Stevens
Canyon Road extending to Foothill Expressway and associated feeder
arteries are dire. A sophisticated traffic flow analysis and computer
simulations of differing alternatives will undoubtedly show this to be
true. At the very least, the Council should require the latest in
simulative study of any proposals in the required E.I.R.
3. NOISE: No one can doubt that schools produce a variety of noises, all
of which would be new to the tranquil project area. The most
significant complication to the noise issue at the proposed academy is
the topography of the site. Since the academy will be located in and
near an abandoned quarry, the site will be surrounded by earthen cliffs,
over one hundred feet in height, which will reflect sound to the north
in the direction of existing residents. Thus any sounds emanating from
the campus will effectively be magnified and washed over the residential
community. This phenomenon is regularly experienced by residents when
hikers are walking or youngsters are playing in the quarry area and its
immediate surroundings. Since the academy plans to make the property
available to outside groups for differing activSties, the noise issue
will not be limited to school hours only. This entire issue needs to be
thoroughly studied and addressed in the E.I.R.
4. DEGRADATION OF VISUAL CHARACTER: This issue, aptly identified and
named by the Community Development Department $~,~ary is of particular
concern to me. Our existing home in Rancho Deep Cliff is the closest
in proximity to any of the proposed structures. Our home will literally
be in the shadow cast by a twenty foot tall retreat center looming less
than 40 feet from our residence. A second major building will be
visible within about 100 feet. Surely a project with over one hundred
acres of property to work with does not require major structures to be
so closely sited to existing neighbors and to create such a major
degradation of the "visual character". The closest of the buildings
appears to have an external patio area to be used by conference
groups. Due to the planned proximity, even simple quiet conversations
by groups immediately adjacent to our home will unfortunately be quite
intrusive.
There most assuredly are other major issues of concern, many of which I
am sure will be addressed by other local citizens. Perhaps the most
disappointing aspect of this project from my point of view has been the
apparent lack of concern by the developer for the local residents
perspective and input. The plans for Canyon Heights Academy have long
been in the works by the developer and his team, and no apparent
· voluntary efforts were made to contact the residents prior to the urging
of such contact by the City of Cupertino. Such blatant disregard by the
developer seems to reflect an unbelievable naivet~ or arrogance, perhaps
both, that does not bode well for a cooperative and workable
relationship with the community.
Thank you for your consideration of these issues.
Sincerely,
Steve Faust
11033 Canyon Vista Drive
Cupertino, CA 95014
408.255.1989
SteveFaust@home.com
David Knapp
From: Steve Patt [slp@stevenscreek.com]
Sent: Monday, June 18, 2001 2:27 PM
To: Mayor Sandra James; rlowenthalQcupertino.o~g; dbumettQcupertino.org;
mchang~cupertino.org; davek~cupertino.org
Cc: residents~stevenscanyon.com
Subject: Canyon Academy Proposal
Mayor and City Council,
I am writing after having read in the Cupertino Courier about tonight's
hearing on a proposal for a school in the old quarry area just northeast
of Stevens Creek County Park. This proposal is a disaster; PLEASE kill
this project now before anyone has to waste any money on development
studies or EIRs or anything else.
Although I don't live in that area (I live near the intersection of 85 &
Stevens Creek Blvd.), I am intimately familiar with the traffic situation
on Stevens Canyon Rd., because I frequently run and bike out that road.
The traffic situation is already a disaster! (And I mean that literally
in the case of one bicyclist). I sat at a light on Foothill the other day
and watched 9 straight trucks go by, heading out the canyon (I was
waiting to turn left so I had time to count them). There is no way this
road, even given any conceivable improvements that could be made, can
handle any increase in traffic.
I laughed when I read about how the school is going to promise to bus
kids in. Sure they are. Living around the corner from Garden Gate School
and seeing the lineup of cars there in the morning as parents drop their
kids off, I'll believe that all the kids at "Canyon Academy" are going to
be riding busses the day I see it in writing, with a million dollar bond
posted for noncompliance. Until then I'll remain a skeptic of any
promises that might be forthcoming. And even if they did bus in students,
what's going to happen when there's a soccer game out there? Are they
going to bus in all the parents too?
Stevens Canyon is a great place for a park. It's no place for a school.
Don't even think about it.
Steven Patt
21346 Rumford Dr.
Cupertino
President, Stevens Creek Software
slp@stevenscreek.com
David Knapp
From: BvladenQaol.com
Sent: Friday, June 15, 2001 1:18 PM
To: davekQcupertlno.org
Subject: Proposed Construction
Dear City Manager Knapp,
I am writing to you on behalf of my husband, William J. Laden, and myself
to state our strong opposition to the proposed construction of Canyon Heights
Academy on Stevens Creek Road (between Ricardo Road and Stevens Creek Park).
Our home is in Monte Vista and we use both Foothill Boulevard and Stevens
Creek Boulevard daily to get to and from our neighborhood. Since we moved
here, we have witnessed the many dramatic changes in the area, all of which
have compounded the use of Foothill Boulevard and Stevens Creek increasingly
each year. We have lived in Cupertino for 20 years and choose to remain here
because of the community's racial and ethnic diversity, excellent public
schools and community college, the evnrionmental richness and proximity to
the foothills, nearness to Rancho San Antonio, access to the many hiking
trails and to the wetlands that include Stevens Creek and Stevens Creek Park.
We feel blessed by these many attributes of our community and wish to
protect them.
With regard to this letter, we are concerned specifically with the
proposed development of land that will impact our community adversely, in
particular a choice area of Cupertino near Stevens Creek Park and Dam, that
will fundamentally change the character of not only the neighborhood
surrounding that area but of the greater area as well. These are our
objections:
1. Is not the designated land zoned for residences only? If so, why
consider changing the zoning law to benefit a private school that in turn
would minimally benefit the community at best? Certainly, according to the
information we.have, the proposed Canyon Heights Academy would utilize 124
acres and its contruction would affect the foothills and the surrounding
wetlands quitely negatively. In fact, the construction would destroy part of
the foothills and severely affect the waterlife that thrives in the wetlands.
2. It would seem that the proposed private school would benefit very few of
Cupertino denizens' children as Cupertino is already noted for its very high
quality public schools. This is one of the strongest reasons prospective
home buyers choose to purchase property in Cupertino -- to send their
children (or future children) to one of California's finest public school
system. Those who would most likely apply and enroll in the proposed private
school would be non-residents and who also most likely would not contribute
to the overall daily economic and social well-being of the community.
3. The proposed private school would most likely incur heavy traffic in and
out of Foothill Boulevard and Stevens Creek daily, incuding evenings. This
combined stretch of roads is already a heavily traveled area from early
morning to early evening. This is due to resident and non-resident commuters
avoiding the 280 Freeway, those trying to get to work and school who actually
live in the area, municipal busses every 10-15 minutes, and the many, many,
many noisey, long hauler gravel trucks that trek up and down Foothill Blvd.
daily beginning at 7:00 am. Adding the many additional vehicles related to
the proposed academy that would enter this area -- those of academy
employees, delivery people, students, parents, visitors, other visitors
attending school events, and so forth -- would surely increase traffic
greatly and create even greater congestion than we have to cope with already.
4. We are concerned about the issues of taxes and electrical energy, as
well. Typically, schools, private and public, do not pay taxes. If so, what
would be the City of Cupertino's benefit to have a private school that would
not contribute to the tax coffers annually yet be able to take daily
advantage of city paid services such as police, fire, library, and so forth?
Also, the demands for electrical energy would be significantly higher for a
school than for private residences in light of the many electrical needs such
a large compound would require, including outdoor lights on at night for
safety reasons.
Please heed ours and surely many other Cupertino residents' plea that you
and the other members of the City Council reject the proposal offered by
backers of the private academy. The environmental, economic, and social
well-being of our community must be preserved; rejecting the proposed
construction will go far to ensure a continuance of the high quality
lifestyle that we all currently enjoy in Cupertino. Thank you.
Sincerely,
Berta Vigil Laden, Ph.D.
David Knapp
From: JT9 [parrot~orimp.com]
Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2001 1:40 PM
To: planning~cupertino.org; davek~cupertino.org; mchange~cupertino.org;
dbumett~cupertino.org; rlowenthal~icupertino.org; sjames~cupertino.org
Subject: Canyon Heights A=aderny proposal for Stevens Canyon site
To: Members of the City Council of Cupertino, CA
David Knapp, City Manager, Cupertino, CA
Planning Department, Cupertino, CA
From: Jan Stoeckenius
Julia Tien
22386 Cupertino Road
tel/fax: 408 996 2064
Date: 6/14/01
Subj: Canyon Heights Academy proposal for Stevens Canyon site
We are writing in regard to the proposed development by the Canyon
Heights Academy in the area adjacent to Stevens Creek Park. We
understand there will be a presentation made to the Cupertino City
Council concerning this proposal on June 18th, but will not be able to
attend due to a prior commitment.
We have no objection in principle to private schools being located in
Cupertino, even if these primarily serve students from other
communities. We also do not question that Canyon Heights Academy would
strive to be a good neighbor and member of the community. We feel,
however, that this specific development is not appropriate for the
proposed site, for several reasons:
a. The proposed size (1500 students plus staff) is in excess of what
can be supported by existing roadways.
This is a large site, but has limited road access. South Foothill
Blvd./Stevens Canyon Road provides only one lane in each
direction. Essentially all access would be from the same
direction.
The nearest "high capacity" road (at the intersection of Stevens
Creek Blvd. and Foothill Blvd.) is about a mile away, and is
already heavily congested during the morning commute.
The topography of the lot and the nature of the surrounding
development makes provision of another access route difficult.
Even if the school served.only boarding students (not practical
for such a large establishment), staff and required service traffic
would be far more than if this parcel were developed as currently
zoned. We live across the street from the Sunny View senior care
facility, a much smaller operation with about 300 residents, none
of whom commute. Traffic generated by the facility, and the
associated noise, is enough to be bothersome at times.
Safety during special events at the school is also a potential
problem area. During events such as graduation, it may be
impossible to provide timely fire, police, or ambulance service
to the school or surrounding neighborhoods due to traffic
congestion. We have witnessed an example of this elsewhere,
but luckily, no life-threatening emergencies occurred during
that instance.
Page 1 of 1
David Knapp
'From: Gary Bailey [figer~ary@earthlink.net]
Sent: Monday, June 18, 2001 1:00 AM
To: davek~cupertino.o~g
Subject: Canyon Heights Academy
Dear City Manager Knapp:
I am writing to express my concerns about the proposed Canyon Heights Academy near Stcvans
Creek in Cupertino. I live along Stevens Creek and I am working in other cities to preserve and
enhance the creek's habitats for fish and other wildlife. That is why I am so concerned about this
environmentally dangerous proposal.
Stevens Creek has been identified by the National Marine Fisheries Service as home to Steeihcad
trout, which is listed as a threatened species. Stevens Creek is also known to be the best urban
wildlife habitat in the cities it passes through and near. The area proposed for Canyon Heights
Acacleiiiy is one of the last remaining viable steelhead spawning sites in Santa Clara County. Please
do not endanger our steeihead and other wildlife with such a pwject.
I understand that this area is currently zoned for low density residential development. Please
continue this zoning, which is much more appropriate for such a sensitive area.
Thank you,
Ballet
tigergary(a~earthl/nk.net
6/18/01
David Knapp
From: David L. Blockus [dblockusOpacbellonet]
Sent: Monday, June 18, 2001 10:57 AM
TO: Mayor Sandra L. James; Vice-Mayor Richard Lowenthal; Council Member Don Bumett;
Council Member Michael Chang; David Knapp, City Manager
Cc: Stevens Canyon Residents Association
Subject: Reject "Canyon Heights Ac, ademy"
Date: June 18, 2001
Subject: Reject "Canyon Heights Academy" development proposal
To: Cupertino City Council
From: Marilyn & David Blockus
10170 camino Vista Drive
Cupertino, CA 95014
We totally oppose construction of the proposed "Canyon
Heights Academy" on Stevens Canyon Road. This area is a
sensitive wilderness habitat for local wildlife. In addition
Stevens Canyon Road is a narrow, twisting, dangerous road,
congested by incessant gravel truck traffic. Additional
traffic stems from the many visitors, who enjoy using the
local parks and recreational areas. There have been numerous
serious accidents on this road. There has been a monument on
the east side of the road, marking a recent fatality, caused
by a gravel truck that hit and killed a cyclist.
Development of the proposed site is ill-advised, for "Canyon
Heights Academy," or any other mid- to high-density project.
During winter rains, a hazard is caused by significant
amounts of water, which flow across the road at this site,
draining from the hills to the west. Recently this site had
an enormous amount (roughly 50x500x20 feet) of soil removed
and subsequently replaced. One of the workman told us that
these activities constituted a "toxic dump site cleanup."
We strongly urge you to reject the "Canyon Heights Academy"
development proposal. We view this matter very seriously,
and plan to wield our votes effectively in the next City
Council election.
Sincerely,
Marilyn & David Blockus
David Knapp
From: ddj [ddj~best.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2001 1:52 PM
To: Mayor Sandra James; Vice Mayor Richard Lowenthal; Don Burnett; Michael Chang; David
Knapp .
Cc: Kelly Crowley; Craig Braon; residents~stevenscanyon.com
Subject: Proposed development/Stevens Canyon Rd.
Dear Mayor, Vice-Mayor, City Council Members, and City Manager:
I am writing in regard to the proposed "Canyon Heights Academy" for the
old quarry site adjacent to Stevens Creek County Park. I will be unable
to attend the City Council meeting this evening, but hope that my
concerns and those of everyone who value wildlife habitat will be
seriously considered.
I have been birdwatching in the old quarry area for many years. I call it
Cupertino's Canyonlands because the quarry site in itself is canyonlike,
and the deep cuts that traverse the site are small canyons within the
canyon. The two biggest areas of willows and cottonwoods are indicators
of the very wet nature of this site. These species, along with sedges,
cattails, and other wetland indicator species, create a very rich habitat
for wildlife. All of the bird species, with the exception of those
associated with the open water of the resevoir, can be observed in these
two swamp and marsh areas and the upland vegetation connecting them.
There is standing water right now in one area of a willow grove that I
observed this weekend, despite the rainless and hot weather we have been
experiencing.
A~y development on this site, whether for a school or houses, will
require major earthmoving to fill in the "canyons" and level the hills,
and an effective drainage system. This will most certainly result in
the total destruction of these wetlands. No development in Cupertino in
recent years, no destruction of habitat in our area, no further eroding
of my quality of life in the last seventeen years, and there are many
examples of these, has saddened me more than the prospect that this rich
and diverse out-of-the-way area of our city will be under obliterated,
like so much of the riparian habitat that once traversed the South Bay.
Over 90% has been destroyed since the first white settlers arrived; two
bird species are now locally extinct and many others threatened due to
loss of this type of wetland.
I won't even begin to address the problem of negative impacts of
development on the precious riparian corridor of Stevens Creek that
passes through this property from Stevens County Park on its way to Linda
Vista Park and Deep Cliff Golf Course.
I sure hope the Environmental Impact Report will include a thorough and
comprehensive twelve month survey of all species using this property,
because there is a lot of data associated with wildlife values. I doubt
if anyone has done a thorough exploration of the flora and fauna, both
resident and migratory, that use this land.
Thank you for your time and work on behalf of Cupertino citizens. Please
extend that care and consideration to the native but non-human
inhabitants as well.
Yours truly,
Deborah Jamison
21346 Rumford Dr.
ddJ@best.com
408-725-0424
!
Page 1 of 1
Kimberly Smith
From: Lynette Low [Lynette.l~wQovac~e.com]
Sent: Monday, June 18, 2001 9:54 AM
To: info@cupertino.org
Subject: Do not want PRIVATE SCHOOL
I have been reading about the new Catholic School that is proposed in the city of Cupertino. Traffic
in my area, 280 and 85 is already pathetic. It takes mc over an hour and the bulk of it is going from
101 to 85 and approaching 280. There is already so much traffic. Please do not approve. The only
access impacts me directly. We pay extra taxes to support the public schools that are already here.
Thanks for your consideration.
LL
Lynette Low
Product Manager
Communications Industry
Voice mail 650.506.5565
Email lynctte.low@oracle.com
6/18/01
David Knapp
From: Gregory Baker [GBAKER~)scu.edu]
Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2001 3:33 PM
To: Davek~cupertino.org
Subject: Opposition to Canyon Heights Academy on Stevens Canyon Road
Dear Mr. Knapp:
I would like to voice my opposition to the proposed development of the Canyon Heights
Academy on Stevens Canyon Road. This development would result in a fundamental change from
the current zoning of RHS, residential hillside. This is inconsistent with the planned use
of this area and the understanding under which residents have purchased and developed
their properties.
The increased traffic on an already congested road would be detrimental to all property
owners in the area and represent a danger to the students who will use the road to access
their school.
I am a Cupertino resident, although I do not live in this area. Out of respect for the
property rights of the landowners in the area, I think that it is important that we
respect their property rights and the implict promise that was made to them when they
purchased their land.
Gregory A. Baker
23615 Oak Valley Road
Cupertino, CA 95014-6554
650-625-1800
Gregory A. Baker, Ph.D.
Breetwor Fellow
Director and Associate Professor
Food and Agribusiness Institute
Santa Clara University
500 E1 Camino Real
Santa Clara, California 95053-0396 USA
e-mail: gbaker@scu.edu
voice: (408) 554-5172, fax: (408) 554-5167
David Knapp
From: Steve Piasecki
Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2001 4:53 PM
To: 'siuwangleung~yahoo.com'
Cc: Peter Gilli; David Knapp
Subject: Canyon Heights Academy
Siu-Wang
I received a copy of your e-mail regarding the Canyon Heights Academy application from
City Manager David Knapp. Thank you for your interest in this application. Attached is a
copy of the staff report summarizing this proposal and outlining the process for further
review.
Please note that the applicant is coming before the City Council at this time, merely to
inform them of this pending development application. The application is considered
incomplete until the environmental impact report (EIR) is completed. The EiR will assess
all development related impacts including traffic impacts. The draft of the EIR is
projected to be completed in October 2001, and the final EIR is estimated to be completed
in February 2002. The public hearings before the Planning Commission and City Council will
occur following completion of the final EIR, estimated to occur in March through May of
2002.
When the application is complete, the city will hold advertised public hearings before the
Planning Commission and City Council. All property owners within 300 feet will
automatically receive mailed notice of the hearings. Others wishing to be notified need
only provide us with their address. You can provide your address by any means you choose
including e-mail, letter, phone or a visit to the planning counter at City Hall.
Even though this is a preliminary meeting it provides an opportunity for the City Council
and members of the public who are aware of the application to express concerns to the
applicant. If you have any questions about the application or the process for review
please feel free to contact myself or the planning staff project manager Peter Gilli
peterg@cupertino.org.
Thanks,
Steve Piasecki
Director of Community Development
City of Cupertino
10,300 Torte Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014
stevep@cupertino.org
(408) 777-3218
David Knapp
From: J EIIIott §elliott~best.com]
Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2001 9:49 PM
To: sjames~icupertino.org
Cc: riowenthal~cupertino.org; dbumett~icupertino.org; mchang~icupertino.org;
davek~cupedino.org
Subject: Canyon Heights Academy
June 14, 2001
Dear Mayor James,
Please vote against the proposed school site on Stevens Canyon Rd.
Thank you,
Janie Elliott
22126 Clearcreek Ct.
Cupertino, CA
David Knapp
From: Fran and Maggie Keeler [fmkealer~home.com]
Sent: Thumday, June 14, 2001 8:53 PM
To: David Knapp; Michael Chang; Sandra James; Richard Lowenlhal; Don Bumett
Cc: alanC~istevenscanyon.com; sharong~stevenscanyon.com
Subject: Canyon Heights Academy
Dear Councilmembers:
The proposed location for the Canyon Heights Academy is a silly idea. The traffic would be a nightmare in my
neighborhood (it's bad enough with the quarry trucks) and the spot is just not appropriate for high density development. I
hope this briefing is just a formality before you disapprove it. Do they really believe that this is the right place?
Slncarely yours,
Finn and Maggie Kealer
22405 Balustrol Ct.
Page 1 of 1
David Knapp
From: golisg [golisQdandy.net]
Sent: Friday, June 15, 2001 5:44 PM
To: sjamesQcupertino.org; rlowenthal~cupertino.org; dbumett~cupertino.org;
mcheng~cupertino.org; devek~cupertino.org; golis gerhard
Cc: alan@stevenscanyon.com; reufinger@home.com; lynfaust@yahoo.com
Subject: Canyon Heights Academy Proposed Zoning Change
Please consider our adamant objection to the request from the developer of the proposed Canyon Heights
Academy (CHA) to change the zoning of that parcel.
As residents of Rancho Deep Cliff for over 21 years, we have the following serious concerns:
1. TRAFFIC Stevens Canyon Road is already overburdened ~ excessive traffic from quarry trucks and
residential growth - it simply cannot handle the massive amount of automobile traffic the proposed Academy
would add. The beck-up from possibly 3,000 additional round triips per day could extend to 280 and 85 on both
Foothill and Stevens Creek Boulevards.
2. ENVIRONMENTAL DESTRUCTION The Stevens Canyon and Creek area is home to many species of
wildlife, both indigenous and migratory, which will be displaced by the CHA construction. Also, the open space
environment itself, adjacent to the County Park and Open Space District, is an irreplaceable asset to Cupertino
and County residents.
3. NOISE Noise generated by the CHA activities will echo up and down the Canyon. For example: sounds
from outdoor events at Monte Vista High School are cleady heard In Rancho Deep Cliff, including those from
Marching Band practice and loudspeakers from sports endsocial events.
4. CITY SERVICES it is our understanding the CHA will be a private tax-exempt school, therefore not
paying property taxes. Where will the revenue come from to finance City services such as fire protection,
police, library, e~c?
5. CHA ENROLLMENT Should CHA suffer an enrollment decline in the future, or not reach its enrollment
goal, causing it to consider closure, what will become of the site? Will the school be demolished, and
ow could the site be restored to its original condition?
We bought our home in 1979, understanding that the surrounding canyon open space would only have some
VERY LOW DENSITY residential development. If the zoning is changed and the proposed Academy built, the
environmental destruction of the canyon, noise, and traffic congestion, could force us from our home. Thank
you for considering our concerns.
Bred and Linde Clayton
11092 Canyon Vista Drive
Ph 257-9026; Fax 257-1968
email reufinaer~home.com
Please do not respond to 'aolis~dendy.net'
6/18/01
David Knapp
From: Stephen Wong [sckwong@yahoo.com]
Sent: Friday, June 15, 2001 4:51 PM
To: mchang~cupertino.org; davek~lcupertino.o~g; sjames~lcupertino.org
Subject: Against Private School at Steven Canyon Road
Dear City Council Members and the City Manager,
I am deeply concemed about the proposed private
school site at Stevens Canyon Road. Traffic
congestion and traffic safety are myutmost concern.
I live on Merriman Road andI use F=Othill
Boulevard every day. With the combination of
increasing commuter traffic and gravel trucks
traveling to and from the quarry,/feel that Foothill
Boulevard and Stevens Canyon Road are already
overburdened. We do not need more traffic on these
roads. Furthermore, I feel that the addition of this
private school does not add any benef'~s to Cupertino
residents and property owners. I choose to live in
Cupertino because of its great public school system.
As electedpublic officials, I expect you to do what
is right for Cupertino and its residents.
Regards,
Stephen Wong
Do You Yahool?
Yahool Buzz Index - Spot the hottest trends in music <http://rd,,vahoo.com/mail us/tag/?
htt~://bu~,yahoo.corn/leaders/music/>, movies <htti;)://rd.yahoo.com/mail us/tag/?
htt~://bu77.yahoo.corn/leadem/actors and actresses/>, and more <http://rd,yahoo.com/mail us/tag/?
httg:llbuT:,,yahoo.comlmovers/>. '
David Knapp
From: Stephen B. Robie [sbrobie~}ooncentric.net]
Sent: Saturday, June 16, 2001 8:58 AM
To: sjames~cupertino.org; rlowenthal~cupertino.org; dburnett~cupertino.org;
mchang~cupertino.org; davek~cupertino.org .
Subject: Canyon Heights Academy project
Dear Cupertino City Council,
I will not have a chance to attend the city council meeting on the 18th, but
I would like to let you know of my opposition to the proposed construction
of Canyon Heights Academy on Stevens Canyon Road.
The hillsides of Cupertino are one of the few places in the Silicon Valley
where you don't feel like a million or more people live nearby. This is
precious to me. As such, I believe that there should be as little
development on the hillsides as possible and any development that does occur
should be consistent with the existing natural setting.
I believe that the area proposed for the Canyon Heights Academy is currently
zoned residential hillside and designated residential very low density. The
school and the increases in traffic that it would bring along Stevens Canyon
Boulevard are not consistent with this zoning. In addition, I am concerned
about possible environmental damage to the nearby sections of Stevens Creek
and the surrounding oak woodland habitat.
I am not opposed to the construction of a private school in Cupertino. I
just think that there must be a more appropriate place for it. Please oppose
this project.
Sincerely,
Stephen B. Robie, Ph.D.
20325 Via Volante
Cupertino, CA
David Knapp
From: Diane Cohn [diane~iwildeye.com]
Sent: Friday, June 15, 2001 7:53 PM
To: sjames~cuperfino.org; mchang~cupertino.org; davek~cupertino.org
Subject: Proposed Private School for Stevens Canyon Road
Dear Sirs and Madam,
I live at 10140 Lockwood Drive in Cupertino.
I am against the proposed Canyon Heights Academy. Stevens Canyon Road is
already overburdened with residential, recreational and Cement Factory
traffic. Foothill Expressway already jams up every school morning at Stevens
Creek Blvd and where people enter the neighborhood where Stevens Creek
Elementary is located.
Cupertino has excellent schools. We don't need a private academy serving
mainly non-Cupertino residents, adding to Foothill/Stevens Canyon traffic
problems. This school won't even pay taxes, so really, what's the value add?
It would be better to build private homes on that parcel.
Thank you,
Diane Cohn
David Knapp
From: Fran & Dick Singleton [rsingleton~ioro.net]
Sent: Sunday, June 17, 2001 6:40 AM
To: sjames~icupertino.org; rlowenthal~icupertino.org; dburnett~cupertino.org;
mchangC~cupertino.org; davek~icupertlno.org
Subject: Proposed School - Stevens Canyon Road and Ricardo
I am an absentee owner of property in the Westridge development of
Cupertino, and I would like to state my opposition to the large school
that is proposed for the Stevens Canyon-Ricardo Road area.
It is my feeling that such a development will place a higher tax burden
on the people of Cupertino.and will strain the city resources for the
maintenance of the property and roads leading to the area. Bussing in
1500 or more children can lead to vandalism, fires that could be set
due to cigarette smoking, and increased drug use.
Property values could be reduced as people would no longer view the area
as scenic. The natural enviroD_ment at Stevens Creek Park could be hurt
by teens driving out there after school due to the close proximity of
the park to the school.
In closing, I would like to repeat my opposition to this project.
Very truly yours,
Francine Singleton
David Knapp
From: FLee51~aol.com
Sent: Saturday, June 16, 2001 9:39 PM
To: davek~cupertino.org
Subject: 1500 Student Pdvate School Proposed for Stevens Canyon Road
Dear City Manager:
Our house is situated Just off Stevens Canyon Road. It is our greatest
astonishment after reading the mail-out from the Stevens Canyon Residents
Association regarding the 1500 student school proposed for Stevens Canyon
Road. Stevens Canyon Road, as it is, is already stuffed with dirt trucks and
Stevens Reservoir park visitors. It is quite dangerous getting on and off
Stevens Canyon Road. We can not i~gine how bad the traffic could be if the
school is approved.
We fully support the opionions brought up by the Stevens Canyon Residents
Association in their mail-out. Please carefully consider their request and
reject the shool proposal.
Sincerely yours~
Fran and Frank Lee
10935 Miramonte Road
Cupertino
David Knapp
From: Geny A. Brown [gerryC~gbrown.oom]
Sent: Sunday, June 17, 2001 9:43 AM
To: sjames¢~cupertino.org; rlowenthal~icupertino.org; dburnett~cupertino.org;
mcheng~cupertino.org
Cc: davek~cupertino.org
Subject: Plans for Stevens Canyon Private School
Dear Mayor and Council Members,
As a property owner in Cupertino, I would like to ask you to turn
down the request to establish the Canyon Heights Academy.
The traffic on Stevens Canyon / South Foothill is already at it's
limits. To establish an institution that would increase the load by
1000 or more autos twice a day would be a problem. First there would
be the mix of heavy truck traffic and teen age drivers. Then the
traffic would be concentrated at a time when both the commuters from
the Hwy 9 shortcut and the truckers would be mixed with the parents
dropping off the children. I live here. You don't. The truckers
and Hwy 9 drivers do NOT obey the speed limits; especially in the
morning.
I foresee the children making a beeline for Stevens Canyon Market at
lunchtime and after school. This would be a problem as the
pedestrian traffic mixes with the loaded gravel trucks screaming down
the hill.
Ail this means that the City of Cupertino will have to increase it's
police, fire, and ambulance coverage to meet the demand. I somewhat
agree with the Stevens Canyon Resident's Association that asking the
tax payers to subsidize a religious school that is exempt from taxes
is wrong. But if you asked me how I would feel if it was a public
school, I would still oppose it.
Stevens Canyon and Foothill Blvd do NOT have the facilities to
support the increased traffic OR to this particular mix of traffic.
PLEASE DENY THE REQUEST.
I would be obliged to vote against any or all of you who support this
matter at re-election time.
Thank You,
Gerry A. Brown
Gerry A. Brown Tel 408.253.7031
10600 S. Foothill B1vd e-mail mailto:gerry@gbrown.com
Cupertino CA 95014-3931 web http://www.gbrown.com
David Knapp
From: Ignatius Y. Ding [ignatius_.ding_2OOOOyahoo.com]
Sent: Sunday, June 17, 2001 1:40 PM
To: sjamesOcupertino.org; dowenthal~cupertlno.org; dbumett~upertino.org;
mchang~cupertino.org; davek~cuperflno.org
SubJect: Opposing to Build School on Stevens Canyon Road
Dear Mayor and councilmen,
We are writing to you to.oppose the development plan of the
Canyons Heights Academy.
The traffic brought by a school on Stevens Canyons Road will
definitely further cause severe environmental impact and
irreversible health hazards to the area that has long suffered
from the diesel fume from hundreds of huge trucks zipping through
on the daily basis.
Will the narrowness of the Foothill Blvd. and Stevens Canyon Road
be in the best interests of the students? The location is the
worst choice for a private school which is absolutely no need in
our neighborhood where internationally well-known schools are
readily available to our children. One must ask who are the
developers trying to build a school for. Obviously, not for us?
Why should the City of Cupertino allow such a tax-exempted
enterprise to brutally invade our lives?
We are pleading for your good senses and leadership in rejecting
the application of this building proposal.
Sincerely,
Ignatius Y. Ding and Josephine C. Ding
10397 Avenida Lane
Cupertino, CA 95014-3946
Ignatius_Ding_2000@yahoo.com
Jiswei@juno.com
Do You Yahoo!?
Spot the hottest trends in music, movies, and more.
http://buzz.yahoo.com/
David Knapp
From: Joe Carroll necarrolll~iyahoo.com]
Sent: Sunday, June 17, 2001 6:11 PM
To: davek~icupertino.org
Subject: Canyon Heights Academy
City Manager,
I am writing you tonight after much thought about the
proposed. Canyon Heights Academy. My wife and I have
been residents of Cupertino for 29 years. The last
22.5 years we have lived at 10414 Melissa Court.
During that time we have seen significant change take
place in our surrounding neighborhood.
We access Foothill Bird/Stevens Canyon Road via the
Voss intersection. This intersection has become
increasingly dangerous due to the large amount of
traffic. It has been my experience that 50% of the
trucks run the red light when it is green for a person
on Voss to access Foothill/Stevens Canyon Road. To add
the traffic for 1500 students plus staff on top of
that would be ludicrous.
We are avid supporters of the schools in Cupertino and
vote for every bond issue or participate in fund
raisers when approached. We do not see any value
added to the community by the proposed school. Ail we
envision are an increase in traffic with potential of
major accidents and an increase in taxes to support
something which could be considered a major nuisance
to us.
Any other usage of the property other than what is
currently zoned would be unwelcomed in our
neighborhood.
As voters and taxpayers we encourage you to spend your
decision making time on something that will improve
the quality of life for the neighborhood and not a
deteioration of the quality of life.
Sincerely,
Joe Carroll
Do You Yahoo!?
Spot the hottest trends in music, movies, and more.
http://buzz.yahoo.com/
David Knapp
From: Marylin McCarthy [m4~eadhlink.net]
Sent: Sunday, June 17, 2001 10;20 PM
To: davek~cupertino.org
Subject: Canyon Heights Academy - a not so good ideal
June 16, 2001
Dear David Knapp,
Please add my voice to the already mounting opposition regarding the
proposed building of the Canyon Heights Academy.
It is inconceivable that any one person or organization/developer who
is familiar with the already compromised environment along Foothill
Blvd. or Stevens Canyon Road from all the diesel trucks would welcome
any increase in traffic, and the resulting increase in emissions this
traffic would bring.
Increasing traffic along these streets, with cars carrying an
increasing nuRSer of children into the area does not seem to have the
best interest of these students and the surrounding residents in mind.
Let's not forget that it will not just be the students and their parents
in these increasing number of cars but teachers and service vehicles
needed in the upkeep of the school buildings and grounds.
We already have excellent public schools in the area and with Saint
Joseph's, Saint Simon's and Pinewood close by this seems more than
adequate to service the needs of the surrounding community.
I urge you to please reject this proposal which so obviously serves the
needs of the developer first and not the local Cupertino residents.
Marylin McCarthy
10159 Cass Place
Cupertino, Ca. 95014-2751
m4@earthlink.net
David Knapp
From: Marylin McCarthy [m4i~}earthlink.net]
Sent: Sunday, June 17, 2001 9:21 PM
To: Ignatius Y. Ding
Cc: sjames~cupertino.o~g; dowenthal~cupertino.org; dburnett~cupertino.org;
mchang~cupertino.org; davek~cupertino.org
Subject: Re: Opposing to Build School on Stevens Canyon Road
Thanks Ignatius for this letter, it was aweel said! I plan to attend
the council meeting tomorrow night!MMMM.
David Knapp
From: marshall_meple~agilent.com
Sent: Monday, June 18, 2001 8:58 AM
To: davek~ _cypertino.org; mchang~cupertlno.org; rlowenthal~cupertino.oq];
dbumett~cupoertino.org; sjamesli~cupertino.org
Cc: marshalbmaple~agilent.~om
Subject: Proposed New School off Steven Canyon
Hello Cupertino City Council,
I wanted to let you know that I'm opposed to the plan to allow a private
school to be built off Stevens Canyon Road. This would create severe
traffic conditions at the peak hours of school operation and would require
significant upgrades to the roads to accommodate 1500 additional cars. The
loading on the roads is already quite bad with all the larger quarry trucks,
commuters, and parents taking kids to Kennedy, Monta Vista, and Stevens
Creek schools. If this plan is allowed to go forward please ensure that it
is a win for the community, which in my mind means significant
infrastructure upgrades.
Also, can you tell me when this is going to be reviewed today at the city
council meeting?
Thank you for you understanding in this situation.
Sincerely,
Marshall Maple
David Knapp
From: matthew wong [mattandkim95014~ahoo.com]
Sent: Monday, June 18, 2001 8:53 AM
To: davek~cupertino.org
Subject: No on - Canyon Heights Academy
We are unable to attend the meeting tonight concerning
the Canyon Heights Academy. We DO NOT support the
approval of this project that would increase
congestion in our area. The gravel trucks and current
traffic is already bad enough and it would be
unacceptable to add to. the current situation.
Thank you'for your attention to this concern!
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
David Knapp
From: JoAnnLJdderKos@gateway.net
Sent: Monday, June 18, 2001 9:35 AM
To: davek~cupertino.o~g
Subject: Canyon Heights Academy
I was horrified when i received the proposal of this large school being added
to Stevens Canyon Blvd.
My grandchild attends a private school in Los Gatos..but it has been there a
very long time and the people who moved there later have complained about
that traffic over the small road..and there are not as many trips and no huge
trucks to endanger the traffic.
Adding 3,000 trip (1,500 each way) added to the great number of trucks that
travel that small road each day and it is an accident waiting to happen.
The threat to the environment is beyond belief..and I am sure if the past is
any example your committee will come up with a negative declaration..a sin in
itself..for if this is not an environmental disaster I never saw one..and I
have seen them here in Regnart Canyon..with a negative declaration..a farce.
Please, do not allow this last remnant of Cupertino to be turned into just
another cement city..We already have enough without .adding this for profit
school.
We already have the best school system in the valley. Why do we need a
private school that will only drain the present school system of some of the
"richest kids" and ruin their environment besides.
Respectively submitted,
Jo-Ann Gholson
22126 Regnart Rd.
Cupertino, Ca. 95014
David Knapp
From: Jean Souza I]souza.esm81Qgtelurnni.org]
Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2001 11:01 AM
To: sjamesQcupertino.org; rlowenthal~cupertino.org; dburnett~cupertino.org;
mchang~cupertino.org; davek~cupertlno.org; alan~stevenscanyon.corn;
sharonQstevenscanyon.rom
Subject: Plans for Private School in Stevens Canyon
All,
I received a flier from the Stevens Canyon Residents Association about a
proposed private school for 1500 students located in Stevens Canyon. I
must say at the outset that I am opposed to such a plan as described in
the flier. My reasons are=
1. The 1500 students and 100 or so faculty and staff would place an
unreasonable traffic burden on Foothill Blvd. and surrounding streets.
There is already a significant amount of truck traffic servicing the
Hanson cement plant and the quarries in Stevens Canyon. The proposed
site is too far from Hwy. 280 and 85. The proposed school should be
located near major traffic arteries.
2. As the flier describes it, the school would also be an unacceptable
tax burden. I understand the purpose of the establishment clause, but I
don~t believe that any institution should be exempt from the
responsibilities for the burdens it imposes on the community at large.
3. The revenue generated by the school would not, for the most part,
stay in Cupertino. Few of the staff and faculty could afford to live in
Cupertino. Their salaries would not stay in the area. And there can be
no convincing case for the construction jobs adding to the local
economy. The labor and materials will come from where ever the costs
are the lowest.
4. The highest use for the land may not be as developed real estate.
There are other values to be considered. New development will push wild
species further into the hills. Pesticides used on the grounds will
find their way into the watershed. Homes located away from the highways
will be subjected to a new source of traffic noise. Development is not
always good.
Please consider locating the proposed school elsewhere.
Thank you,
Gregg Senne
22936 Longdown Rd.
Cupertino, CA 95014
408.343.0844
David Knapp
From: Karim R. Shariff [sharilf~nas.nasa.gov]
Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2001 10:47 AM
To: sjamesQcupertino.org; dowenthalQcupertino.org; dbumett~cupertino.org;
mchang~cupertino.org; davek~cupertino.org; alan~stevenscanyon.com
Subject: I oppose Canyon Heights Academy
Dear Representative of the People:
What are you guys doing to improve the quality of life
in Cupertino? I do not equate more companies, more
cars, more noise, more light pollution (so I can't
see the stars anymore) with quality of life. Quality
of life means a sense of place and community and
deep rootedness---an abiding connection with
people and nature. You guys are destroying all of
that.
I oppose building of the Canyon Heights Academy.
Karim Shariff
www.nas.nasa.gov/~shariff
Anne & Phillip Pflager June 12, 2001
22380 Palm Ave
Cupertino, Ca 95014
City Manager, David Knapp
10300 Torte Ave
Cupertino, CA 95014
Dear Mr Knapp,
My wife and ! are long time residents of Cupertino and are strongly opposed to the
Canyon Heights A~ademy development proposed for Stevens Canyon. Such a land use
would have a devastating irapa~ on the environment of this beautiful area. We already
have a family of deer living in our ba~k yard because of the loss of habitat caused by
recent development. The increased noise and traffic are also a major concern.
We believe that the present land use plan should be ~etained and this development should
be denied.
Yours truly,
Anne and Phillip Pflager
From: JT9 [parrot~orimp.com] ' '
Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2001 1:40 PM
To: planning~cupertino.org; davek~cupertino.org; mchange@cupertino.org;
d_burnett~icupertino.org; rlowenthal~cuperflno.org; sjames~cuperflno.org
Subject: uanyon Heights Academy proposal for Stevens Canyon site
To: Members of the City Council of Cupertino, CA
David Knapp, City Manager, Cupertino, CA
Planning Department, Cupertino, CA
From: Jan Stoeckenius
Julia Tien
22386 Cupertino Road
tel/fax: 408 996 2064
Date: 6/14/01
Subj: Canyon Heights Academy proposal for Stevens Canyon site
We are writing in regard to the proposed development by the Canyon
Heights Academy in the area adjacent to Stevens Creek Park. We
understand there will be a presentation made to the Cupertino City
Council concerning this proposal on June 18th, but will not be able to
attend due to a prior commitment.
We have no objection in principle to private schools being located in
Cupertino, even if these primarily serve students from other
communities. We also do not question that Canyon Heights Academy would
strive to be a good neighbor and member of the community. We feel,
however, that this specific development is not appropriate for the
proposed site, for several reasons:
a. The proposed size (1500 students plus staff) is in excess of what
can be supported by existing roadways.
This is a large site, but has limited road access. South Foothill
Blvd./Stevens Canyon Road provides only one lane in each
direction. Essentially all access would be from the same
direction.
The nearest "high capacity" road (at the intersection of Stevens
Creek Blvd. and Foothill Blvd.) is about a mile away, and is
already heavily congested during the morning commute.
The topography of the lot and the nature of the surrounding
development makes provision of another access route difficult.
Even if the school served only boarding students (not practical
for such a large establishment), staff and required service traffic
would be far more than if this parcel were developed as currently
zoned. We live across the street from the Sunny View senior care
facility, a much smaller operation with about 300 residents, none
of whom commute. Traffic generated by the facility, and the
associated noise, is enough to be bothersome at times.
Safety during special events at the school is also a potential
problem area. During events such as graduation, it may be
impossible to provide timely fire, police, or ambulance service
to the school or surrounding neighborhoods due to traffic
congestion. We have witnessed an example of this elsewhere,
but luckily, no life-threatening emergencies occurred during
that instance.
b. Compatibility with the surrounding community
In terms of population density, the proposed development is roughly
equivalent to developing the entire site using R1-7.5 zoning (if this
were possible given the topography). This is a much higher density than
the surrounding areas, with the exception of a small number of lots
along Ricardo Road. The proposal would bring relatively high density
development directly to the boundary of Stevens Creek Park.
In contrast, the existing zoning protects the park with a
low-density buffer zone.
c. Compensation for provision of urban serivces
Because Canyon Heights Academy is a tax exempt religious organization,
it is not clear to us that the school would pay sufficient taxes and
fees to compensate the City for the cost of providing urban services to
the site.
As noted above, the proposed population density is approximately
the same as if the site was developed with R1-7.5 zoning. Under
this hypothetical zoning, the site could hold about 425
homes. Given current housing prices, this number of new homes
would generate over $3 million annually in property tax, a portion
of which would fund urban services provided by the city. Would
the proposed school provide comparable compensation?
In comparison, development under the existing low-density zoning
would generate much less revenue, but would also require fewer
services due to the smaller added population (approximately 24
homes with perhaps 100-125 residents total).
We also do not expect this project to provide much in the way of
indirect benefits to the City. A large majority of the student
population is likely to come from outside the community, and we
anticipate few of the faculty/staff members would live
locally. There are no businesses adjacent to the property that
might be patronized by individuals associated with the school
(e.g. a 7-Eleven or Starbucks), and we certainly would not
encourage development of such.
Due to the isolated location, there is no reason to expect the
school to favor Cupertino businesses in its own transactions.
We thus expect the indirect economic benefits of the school to be
much less than those of a residential development of comparable
density.
This location is one of the few remaining rural 'areas of the city and we
encourage the city to preserve its character by retaining the current,
very low density residential zoning of the parcel.
Sincerely,
Jan Stoeckenius and Julia Tien
June 18th MONTA VISTA PARKING ISSUE Page 3 of 3
Richard Lowenthal
Don Burnett
Michael Chang
Kimberly Smith, City Clerk
6/18/01
June 18th MONTA VISTA PARKING ISSUE Page 2 of 3
WILL BE NOWHERE FOR PARRNTS TO PULL IN TO THE '
CURFI TO DROP OFF CHILDREN. Parents sometimes park one
or more blocks away to deliver and pick up their children.
ELEMENTARY CHILDREN WALKING TO SCHOOL WILL
BE ENDANGERED BY BLIND SPOTS CREATED BY
ADDITIONAI. CONGESTED HIGH SCHOOL CURB
PARKING & MANEUVERING.
3. NUISANCE
We fought this battle in the 1980's when we won Permit Parking.
Now we don't have the graffiti painted on our fences, the litter
and cigarette butts from students is only from students walking
home or sitting on our curbs at various hours during the school
day, students no longer sit on top of their cars and blare loud
music, there is less racing down the streets by students, and we
can now park under our own street trees that we nurtured so we
could park in the shade.
4. PROPOSAL
USE THE PARKING LOT AT BLACKltERRY FARM -700
SPACES ! ! !
CHARGE A FEE DAILY OR QUARTERI.Y LIKR THEY DO AT
DEANZA COLLEGE for the parking privilege.
THIS WOULD PAY FOR A PARKING MONITOR IF NEEDED
(as Monta Vista says) AS WELL AS A SHUTTLE BUS FOR
THOSE WHO CAN NOT WALK THE ONE-HALF MILE OR
LESS TO THE HIGH SCHOOL.
ENCOURAGE BIKING!! TAKE SOME LESSONS FROM
PALO AI.TO HIGH SCHOOL WHERR THEY HAVE A VERY
SUCCESSFUL PROGRAM.
Thank you for your attention.
Fredric and Patricia Dentinger
New Haven Ct. at comer of Presidio
Cc: Sandra James
6/18/01
June 18th MONTA VISTA PARKING ISSUE Page I of 3
Kimberly Smith
From: Pat Dentinger [pdentingerC~rnlndspring.com]
8ant: Sunday, June 17, 2001 6:59 PM
To: sjames~}cupertino.org
Cc: rlowenthalQcupertino.org; dbumettQcupertino.org; mchang@cupertino.org;
kimberlys~cupertino.org
Subject: June 18th MONTA VISTA PARKING ISSUE
URGENT: JUNE 18, 2001 CITY COUNCIL M~.ETING TOPIC
Cupertino City Council Members
Re: Neighborhood Parking Issue
MONTA VISTA HIGH SCHOOL WANTS TO CONVERT OUR
NEIGHBORHOOD INTO A HIGH SCHOOL PARKING LOT!!!
We would like to make the following comments and suggestions:
1. SAFETY
Within the past 5 years the traffic on Presidio and Fort Baker has
become horrific to say the least!!! Cars are dropping off children
at Lincoln Elementary, Monta Vista H.S., and circling around to
access Kennedy Jr. High. Fewer children seem to be able to walk
to school. We have lived here for 30+ years and this was not the
case in the past. Part of the problem may stem from the fact that
now students in the whole school district may petition Monta Vista
to get in even though they are closer to another school.
CHILDREN LIVING CLOSEST TO MONTA VISTA SHOULD
GO TO MONTA VISTA.
ATTENTION: Statistics for traffic on Presidio done last week
don't reflect a normal school day because they were done after the
3 schools were basicly closed and graduations were over.
2., PROPOSED HIGH SCHOOL PARKING MAKRS ADDED
SAFETY FACTOR
If you add High School students in parking spaces in front of
every house on Presidio and Fort Baker, there will be an
INCREASED DANGEROUS SITUATION BECAUSE THERR
6/18/01