CC 09-21-2021 Oral Communications_Late Written CommunicationsCC 09-21-21
#15
Housing Element
Contract
Written Comments
1
Cyrah Caburian
From:Neil Park-McClintick <neil@cupertinoforall.org>
Sent:Tuesday, September 21, 2021 6:13 PM
To:City Council; Cupertino City Manager's Office; City Clerk
Subject:Item 15 (Housing Element) Should be pulled from Consent
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 Cupertino City Council,
I am writing to request that a member of City Council pull item 15 from the consent calendar. It's far too important and
worthy of discussion to simply approve without some level of discussion. The item is listed below. These are questions I
am proposing out of genuine concern, not as a call‐out of the City, its Staff, or its Council.
"Initiate Sixth‐Cycle General Plan Housing Element update, consider consultant agreement to complete the
Sixth‐Cycle General Plan Housing Element update, related rezoning, and all necessary environmental review as
required under State law, and associated budget modification."
There are several questions that deserve to be answered here as part of this initiation process:
1. Why are we paying so much for EMC planning services to produce our Housing Element, considering their lack of
experience in producing such documents (to my knowledge). EMC appears to simply be a planning firm, yet we
are being charged. significantly more
Palo Alto has 33% more units to plan for and found a consultant to do it for $100+K less than Cupertino, and
they started 5 months earlier.
Mountain View has 2.4X more units to plan and found a consultant to do it for $266K, almost 1/3 the cost of
Cupertino, and they started 9 months earlier.
2. Why has it taken so long to find a consultant?
I recognize this is not a particularly easy task; this document will be extremely complex, hence the need to seek
consultation. But as referenced above, nearby cities are way ahead of us in this process because we took so long
to find a consultant. My belief is that the City struggled to find a partner that would be willing to work with
Cupertino. It's worth asking why this is the case. Why do consulting firms not want to work with Cupertino on its
Housing Element. This is not normal.
3. Is this over budget? If this is the case, then the City needs to take the HE more seriously.
Cupertino only budgeted $295K for this, so with legal, noticing etc. they are almost $800K over budget. This is
my understanding. Please correct me if I am wrong.
This should absolutely be the City's #1 priority over EVERYTHING else. It deserves time, funding, care, and
passion.
Thanks for your consideration, and I hope that this item receives a discussion and is pulled from consent.
2
Sincerely,
Neil Park‐McClintick
Chair, Cupertino for All
CC 09-21-21
#16
Suicide Prevention
Policy
Written Comments
1
Cyrah Caburian
From:Khuu, Lucy <Lucy.Khuu@asm.ca.gov>
Sent:Tuesday, September 21, 2021 4:57 PM
To:City Council; City Clerk
Subject:FOR PUBLIC COMMENT - Suicide Prevention Policy - Office of Asm. Evan Low
Attachments:Cupertino City Council Meeting 9.21.21 - Suicide Prevention Policy.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.
Dear Cupertino City Council,
I hope this email finds you well.
Please find attached a letter of support from Assemblymember Evan Low regarding the Suicide Prevention Policy on the
Cupertino City Council September 21st, 2021 Agenda.
Please let me know if you have any questions at all.
Sincerely,
Lucy Khuu
Field Representative
Office of Assemblymember Evan Low | 28th Assembly District
District Office Mainline: (408) 446‐2810
September 21, 2021
Cupertino City Council
City of Cupertino City Hall
10300 Torre Ave
Cupertino, CA 95014
RE: Cupertino City Council Meeting September 21st, 2021 – Suicide Prevention Policy
Dear Cupertino City Council:
I am writing to strongly urge the City of Cupertino to adopt a Resolution approving the addition of a
Suicide Prevention Policy to the Council Policy Manual.
Each year, thousands of people die due to suicide nationwide. Santa Clara County, specifically, has over
one hundred instances of suicide deaths annually. While the causes of suicide are complex and are
determined by multiple factors, suicide prevention is simple. With a suicide prevention policy,
communities can raise awareness of suicide and support people who are at risk of suicide.
Currently, all school districts in Santa Clara County and 8 out of 15 cities in the County have adopted a
form of suicide prevention policy. By adopting the policy as well, Cupertino, who represents a large part
of the County’s residents, will be the 9th city who will be part of the battle against suicides.
Suicide is an important public health concern that impacts our community at all ages, genders, and
ethnicities, and results in long-lasting negative effects on individuals and their families. Adopting a
suicide prevention policy is a step in the direction that we need to ensure that we continue to protect and
support our community from mental and public health concerns.
As a committed mental health advocate, I respectfully ask for your support in adopting a suicide
prevention policy to save the lives of the residents here in Cupertino and Santa Clara County.
Sincerely,
Evan Low
Chair, Committee on Business & Professions
Assemblymember, 28th District – San José/Silicon Valley