CC 03-02-2021 Oral Communications_Late Written CommunicationsCC 03-02-21
Study Session #1
Rancho Rinconada
Recreation and
Park District
Written Comments
1
Cyrah Caburian
From:Jordan Eldridge <eldridgejordan@yahoo.com>
Sent:Tuesday, March 2, 2021 10:59 PM
Subject:Comments Regarding Rancho Rinconada Recreation and Park District Study Session
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the
sender and know the content is safe.
March 2, 2021
Cupertino City Council
Parks and Recreation Commission
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014
Re: The Rancho Rinconada Recreation & Park District Study Session
Dear Mayor Paul, Members of the City Council, and Members of the Parks and Recreation Commission:
I felt compelled to respond in writing to comments that were made at the Rancho Rinconada Recreation and
Park District (RRRPD) Study Session this evening, and I am hoping that my comments will help as this item
moves forward.
I understand the frustration that members of the Cupertino Parks and Recreation Commission felt when I
mentioned that they did not do an adequate job studying this item. No one likes to hear criticism but it was
not meant to be a personal attack on any one member of the Commission.
RRRPD recently went through a tumultuous time between 2018 and 2019. As I mentioned during public
comments, this conflict was created out of a personality conflict between one board member and RRRPD’s
District Manager. I was recruited to run again in 2018 by a RRRPD board member directly involved in this
conflict but distanced myself once they began to circulate libelous campaign fliers and posts on Nextdoor, and
because the accusations were proven false to me during my own review of the complaints. However, it is
important to note that there is always room for improvement in any organization or agency. I did my best to
do as much as I could during my short appointment on the board to improve operations, write policy, and
pushed to get the strategic plan process going once the new board was in place.
I do understand that at times we hear something that sounds awful before recognizing that statements that
were made were not true. That is the case in this situation. The complaints that were lodged against RRRPD
and its management were baseless and I am proud of the way General Manager Kevin Davis handled the
fiasco. It was a growing moment for both staff and remaining board members.
I was convinced to take on the third director position after the resignation of two board members by the
County Board of Supervisors ‐ in order to provide some stability before a new board could be sworn in after
the 2020 general election. This was a position I did not want nor asked for but I was willing to help. The
comment that the board was trying to “hold on to power” is simply not true. All three of the previous board
members at the time said that we were supportive of this move if we felt it made sense to the district, to
2
Rancho Rinconada residents, and the City. We did our due diligence and decided that there were too many
unanswered questions. We wanted the district to complete a strategic plan before moving forward.
Here are some of my answers to some of the issues that came up during the study session:
Residents that were interested in board positions were somehow “recruited” by the board to run and only
four residents were interested.
The board did direct and conduct extensive outreach to residents to increase interest in the board.
None of the residents that ran for the board were known to any of the three board members that were
currently on the board, nor were known to Kevin Davis prior to their interest in running.
The Cupertino City Council yields more interest because it is a citywide election. If we were taking
ratios between candidates to residents, Rancho Rinconada outperformed the city. (Cupertino yielded 1
candidate for every 12,051 residents; Rancho Rinconada yielded 1 candidate for every 875 residents).
10% of the residents of Rancho Rinconada regularly use the facility
On the surface, this may be correct. However, this facility is literally on the corner of the City of
Cupertino. The City of San Jose surrounds this facility. Other recreation facilities in Cupertino are
deeper within the city’s boundaries, so it makes sense that more users of those facilities are residents
of Cupertino. It is my position that this won’t change if the district merges into the City of Cupertino.
Rancho Rinconada’s facility would increase the City’s aquatic recreation offerings.
This facility has been in operation since the 1950s when my grandparents bought their home. It will
be no added benefit to the city’s recreation offerings. The City could partner with RRRPD to increase
visibility to Cupertino residents.
Current taxes given to RRRPD by properties within Rancho Rinconada are taken out of the City’s property
tax allocation
This is not true. Please review https://payments.sccgov.org/propertytax/TaxAllocation
o You could use my grandparents’ property as a reference (18980 Barnhart Ave)
City of Cupertino receives 6.16% of our property taxes
Rancho Rinconada receives 4.61% of our property taxes
o I looked at a random sample of homes around Cupertino and every one I looked at shows
that property taxes throughout the city are roughly between 6.15‐6.5% tax allocation to the
City. If RRRPD’s taxes are transferred to the City of Cupertino, we would be paying 10.77% of
our property tax allocation to the City of Cupertino. Far higher than other homes throughout
Cupertino.
There is no guarantee that this tax allocation will occur based upon the formulas the county uses to
allocate property taxes, and so the RRRPD could be a significant burden to the City’s general fund.
There was a comment made saying that the county’s tax reallocation to the city will be routine.
However, that can’t be fully known at this point since the dissolution of a special district in Santa Clara
County ‐or even statewide‐ is not routine. This would be the first special district in Santa Clara County
to merge with a city within the county in its history.
3
I apologize for my lengthy comments, but as a member of the public, I was not able to offer more comments
during the meeting.
If anyone wants to set up a phone call or zoom meeting with me, please feel free. I will be 100% behind any proposal that
makes sense for all stakeholders involved and appreciate the council for taking a step back and letting the RRRPD
strategic plan process take place before moving forward.
Thank you!
Jordan Eldridge
18980 Barnhart Ave (Donald A. Eldridge Little Free Library)
Cupertino CA 95014
408‐591‐5340
eldridgejordan@yahoo.com
bcc: Mayor Darcy Paul; Members of the City Council; Members of the Cupertino Parks & Recreation
Commission; City Manager; Parks and Recreation Department; Kevin Davis
Note: I bbc'd all emails to ensure proper Brown Act compliance, just in case someone decides to respond "all".
Thanks!
CC 03-02-21
Oral
Communications
Written Comments
1
Cyrah Caburian
From:Tanish Savla <tsavla23@gmail.com>
Sent:Tuesday, March 2, 2021 5:37 PM
To:City Clerk
Subject:Active Circle Slides...
Attachments:Active Circle.pdf
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the
sender and know the content is safe.
Hi Kirsten,
Attached are the slides for our meeting at 6:45 pm.
Thanks.
Tanish
Active Circle
Creating active connected communities
Our Story
●Three middle schoolers stuck in a pandemic
●Bored, Inactive and Isolated
●Created a social bubble with community friends
●Went for walks, bike rides, hikes and to local beaches
●Realization - can this be extended to people in our neighborhood and
local community
Our Mission
●Creating active connected communities
●Helping people fight loneliness and depression
●Making people physically active
●Giving back to the community / making people socially responsible
What we've done so far:
Cooking for the homeless Community Yoga Session
https://tinyurl.com/antcircle
Ideas for Cupertino Community
●Organize clean ups at Cupertino creeks and parks
●Help organize virtual walkathons
●Organize activities to help senior citizens
●Other ideas...
Thanks
1
Cyrah Caburian
From:Joseph Fruen <jrfruen@gmail.com>
Sent:Tuesday, March 2, 2021 6:29 PM
To:City Council
Cc:City Clerk; Darcy Paul; Kirsten Squarcia; Jon Robert Willey; Liang Chao; Hung Wei; Kitty Moore
Subject:Resolution in support of the AAPI community
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the
sender and know the content is safe.
Mayor Paul & Councilmembers:
With the rising incidence of anti‐Asian‐American hate crimes‐‐even here in the Bay Area‐‐I hope you will consider
drafting and passing a resolution in support of the AAPI community. Such a resolution would demonstrate the solidarity
of Cupertino's leadership with our community at large, especially in light of Cupertino's demographic makeup. Our
community members deserve to know that their city stands with them.
Many thanks for your consideration,
J.R. Fruen
Cupertino resident
CC 03-02-21
#9
FY 2021-2022
City Work Program
Written Comments
1
Cyrah Caburian
From:Gerhard Eschelbeck
Sent:Tuesday, March 2, 2021 4:24 PM
To:City Council
Subject:Study Session: Review Council goals, City Work Program updates, and proposed draft FY 2021-2022
City Work Program.
Dear Mayor Paul and Cupertino City Council members,
I am a member, and also Chair of the Cupertino Bicycle and Pedestrian Commission. Please allow me to share
a brief comment related to the City Work Program study session. The Bicycle and Pedestrian Commission
thoroughly reviewed various recommendations and suggestions for the FY2021‐2022 City Work Program, and
has selected and voted unanimously on 5 top priority items having most positive impact to the city and our
residents.
From the materials for tonight's study session, it is not entirely clear if 2 of these items made it to the final list:
1) the Stevens Creek Blvd (all the way to Foothill) Bicycle treatment , and 2) the Carmen Bicycle and
Pedestrian Bridge. The Bicycle and Pedestrian Commission certainly concluded these projects being of critical
importance, and hopeful progressing on these two projects will be included in the upcoming work program.
Also, it seems a recommendation was made by staff to include a traffic garden project. While the Bicycle and
Pedestrian Commission reviewed such project last year, and found such project valuable for the city, it did not
raise to the top 5 projects for the work plan 2021‐2022.
Thanks for the opportunity to provide input,
Gerhard Eschelbeck
Gerhard Eschelbeck
Bicycle and Pedestrian Commissioner
geschelbeck@cupertino.org
1
Cyrah Caburian
From:Jenny Griffin <grenna5000@yahoo.com>
Sent:Tuesday, March 2, 2021 8:17 PM
To:City Council
Subject:Number9
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you
recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Is item 9 the goal setting workshop?
1
Cyrah Caburian
From:Jennifer Griffin <grenna5000@yahoo.com>
Sent:Tuesday, March 2, 2021 8:26 PM
To:City Council
Subject:Goal Setting Meeting
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the
sender and know the content is safe.
Dear City Council:
Is Item 9 supposed to be the Goal Setting Session that we usually have
in the hotel or the one we had in the Quinlan Cemter? I did not realize
that this Study Session was teh Goal Setting Session?
Thank you,
Jennifer Griffin
1
Cyrah Caburian
From:Jennifer Griffin <grenna5000@yahoo.com>
Sent:Tuesday, March 2, 2021 8:28 PM
To:City Council
Subject:Vision Zero
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the
sender and know the content is safe.
Dear City Council:
What is Vision Zero? I have never heard of that. Is this part of the
Goal Making Session we have in the hotel or Quinlan?
Thanks,
Jennifer Griffin
1
Cyrah Caburian
From:Jennifer Griffin <grenna5000@yahoo.com>
Sent:Tuesday, March 2, 2021 8:31 PM
To:City Council
Subject:Need a Goal Setting or Stratetic Planning Session for This Number 9
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the
sender and know the content is safe.
Dear City Council;
I think Number 9 needs to be a regular Goal Setting Meeting to go over this
because there is so much. I have not heard of Vision zero before. Usually
they have these things introduced in the long Goal Setting meetiing.
Thank you,
Jennifer Griffin
1
Cyrah Caburian
From:Jennifer Griffin <grenna5000@yahoo.com>
Sent:Tuesday, March 2, 2021 9:00 PM
To:City Council
Subject:Traffic Garden
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the
sender and know the content is safe.
Dear City Council:
What is a Traffic Garden? I am very concerned that the public is not being made
aware of what some of these items are. Maybe this can be discussed at the
longer meetings. We need to have time to discuss these things.
Thank you very much,
Jennifer Griffin
1
Cyrah Caburian
From:tessa parish <tessa@parishrealestategroup.com>
Sent:Tuesday, March 2, 2021 9:20 PM
To:City Clerk; City Council
Cc:Cupertino City Manager's Office; HousingCommission
Subject:Comment about the work plan from Housing
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the
sender and know the content is safe.
I was not planning to comment but after hearing the city mangers' response to our proposal, I want to comment
on it.
I'm on the housing commission but I'm speaking as myself. It won't be in time to be mentioned for tonight's
meeting but I would like to comment on the Supervisor's reasons for not adding the subcommittee.
The staff is stretched thin. As a Realtor for over 20 yrs i can tell you that even though the staff has acquisition
as a purpose, given the RHNA numbers and what will be requested of us, the more people looking the better.
**my experience is that you can have different agents contact a seller but then 1 agent will finally decide to sell.
So different people get different results. It cannot hurt to have more eyes, ears and attention on locating
properties for the city. It cannot hurt.
** Also, the subcommittee can say for example take the golf course and dedicate more time into researching
what CAN be done there.
** The subcommittee if given the authority to locate property can promote the identifying properties throughout
the community and therefore create/generate a desire to obtain properties for low income housing.
I nor the Sue Bose (the other Realtor) would be profiting in any way if we identify a property. I'm sure the city
has its own realtor or attorney. (I mention this in case, there is a concern as a reason for a negative response).
We would be assisting or advising toward the goal of developing affordable housing which is in our work load
and one of the most important goals.
I now know the city has an acquisition department but given our new requirements, it is not business as usual,
we need to improve on our methods. A subcommittee would give the city an extra resource.
I am unaware of the number of buildings that the city has been able to acquire in the last 2 yrs, so if they are
meeting their goal, then I may be way off.
Best Regards,
Tessa Parish
Parish Real Estate Group
408.396.8377
www.ParishRealEstateGroup.com
RHM Realty
BRE#01158499
CC 03-02-21
#12
Municipal Code
Amendment,
Secondhand
Smoke
Written Comments
1
Cyrah Caburian
From:City of Cupertino Written Correspondence
Subject:FW: REVISED CORRECTED- CC Agenda Item 12 Secondhand Smoke-Peggy's Talking Points
Attachments:REVISED FIXED Item 12 Secondhand Smoke-Talking Points for Peggy.pdf
From: Peggy Griffin <griffin@compuserve.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 2, 2021 10:07 PM
To: Kirsten Squarcia <KirstenS@cupertino.org>
Subject: REVISED ‐ CC Agenda Item 12 Secondhand Smoke‐Peggy's Talking Points
Hi Kirsten,
Sorry, if possible, would you replace my original slide with the one attached. Sorry for the inconvenience.
Thank you,
Peggy
From: Peggy Griffin <griffin@compuserve.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 2, 2021 9:45 PM
To: Kirsten Squarcia (KirstenS@cupertino.org) <KirstenS@cupertino.org>
Subject: CC Agenda Item 12 Secondhand Smoke‐Peggy's Talking Points
Hi Kirsten,
I’d appreciate it if you would put this slide up when I talk on Agenda Item 12‐Secondhand Smoke.
Thanks,
Peggy
1) PROTECT OUR SIDEWALKS from second hand smoke!
a) Require these places to provide a smoking zone –
smokers are addicted; they can’t change overnight
i) Outdoor worksites
ii) Multi-unit housing
iii) Offices
2) ADUs – don’t include now BUT
REVISIT IF lots become dense due to Sacramento!
a) attached ADUs - often share the same ventilation system
b) separate ADUs – if close to other units could expose others to smoke
1
Cyrah Caburian
From:Peggy Griffin <griffin@compuserve.com>
Sent:Tuesday, March 2, 2021 11:47 PM
To:City Council
Cc:City Clerk
Subject:2021-03-02 CC Mtg-Item 12 Secondhand Smoke Discussion-Thank you!
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the
sender and know the content is safe.
Dear City Council,
Thank you all for discussing the secondhand smoke topic and items the public brought up. I now understand the
problem trying to protect public sidewalks.
I also appreciate you wanting to protect adjacent property owners from the impacts of designated smoking areas close
to the property line. That IS a horrible thought to be impacted by not just one but many smokers! Please do protect the
neighbors.
I appreciate Vice Mayor Chao and Council Member Moore specifically addressing these issues!
Sincerely,
Peggy Griffin