Loading...
CC 11-16-2021 Oral Communications_Written CommunicationsCC 11-16-21 Oral Communications Written Comments 1 Cyrah Caburian From:Jean Bedord <Jean@bedord.com> Sent:Thursday, November 4, 2021 11:24 AM To:City Council; Cupertino City Manager's Office; City Attorney's Office Subject:Improve housing production to reduce CUSD enrollment decline Follow Up Flag:Follow up Flag Status:Completed 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 and city council members,    I was dismayed by  the council  discussion on the dais at Tuesday night, Nov. 2, council meeting regarding opposition to  CUSD school closures.  While no one, including the school board, wants to close schools, the reality is that there are only  298 students at Regnart who will now have to transfer to Lincoln or BlueHills elementary schools starting the fall of 2022  ‐‐ a full year away (NO closures this year).  COVID‐19 vaccine has been available for adults for less than a year, and is  now becoming available for elementary school children.  By next fall, schools will have a better understanding of  managing the pandemic and the "new normal".    While parents have the right to vent at council meetings, I urge you to avoid expending scarce city and CUSD resources  in second‐guessing a very thoughtful process, and decisions to maintain financial stability for the entire district of 25  campuses in 6 cities, with only 1 campus affected in Cupertino.  You can find the criteria for closure at the CUSD  dashboard with a link on the homepage.  There has been a decline of almost 5,000 students in the last 5 years so there is  a lot of excess capacity in the district ‐‐ CUSD expects to lose 4,000  students in the next 8 years.  There are likely to be  more school closures in the future, but the district has taken a conservative approach pending the Housing Element  process from ALL 6 cities. I recommend you review the FAQ from the district to counter the misinformation expressed  during oral communications.    Lack of housing production is the major factor affecting our schools, so I  urge the council to focus on the needs of the  entire city ‐ approximately 60,000 residents, with seniors vastly outnumbering the K‐5 population. Isn't it time to get  Vallco built?  Isn't it time to provide incentives for building instead of highly restive SB 9 ordinances?      FYI, the district is forming a 7‐11 committee to study future uses for the Regnart campus. The campus will be utilized  through the summer of 2022 by the district.  It's highly unlikely a lease could commence until 2023.  Traffic studies are  moot at this point.    Warm regards,    Jean Bedord    2 Cyrah Caburian From:Randy Shingai <randyshingai@gmail.com> Sent:Thursday, November 11, 2021 10:41 AM To:City Council Cc:City Clerk Subject:Public Comments for 11/16/2021 City Council meeting. Follow Up Flag:Follow up Flag Status:Completed 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 have been reading the imbroglio that Vice Mayor Chao initiated with great interest.  I will spare you the usual  diatribe on why I am outraged, because your inboxes are probably pretty full of that sort of thing by now.    I believe that you, the City Council, will be selecting a new Mayor next month.  I don't care how much  contrition Vice Mayor Chao shows between now and that selection.  I don't care how many crocodile tears she  sheds, Ms. Chao cannot be the Mayor of Cupertino.  Her selection as Mayor would be a tacit endorsement of  her views.    Thanks for your time,  Randy Shingai  San Jose 95129  3 Cyrah Caburian From:Randy Shingai <randyshingai@gmail.com> Sent:Friday, November 12, 2021 2:34 PM To:City Council Cc:City Clerk Subject:Public Comments for 11/16/2021 Council meeting - part two Follow Up Flag:Follow up Flag Status:Completed 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 Council,    I want to explain why I am requesting that Ms. Chao not be the next mayor of Cupertino.    Here are the two fundamental reasons that I find Ms. Chao's activities abhorrent:   Racism is a broad term.  To argue that racism is somehow different from "fear of foreigners" and  other made‐up categories may be true if you want to get really granular in characterizing  discrimination, but it ignores the common usage of the term racism.  It allows Ms. Chao and others like  her to discount the discrimination that other groups are now experiencing, because the racism that  they are experiencing can be segmented into other categories and then can be diminished by this  Orwellian method.   There was an aspect of smugness in the characterization of how Chinese were able to successfully deal  with discrimination in the posts that Ms. Chao shared with me. This "chest thumping" has  consequences:    1.  It undermines efforts to improve inequality, it gives opponents of these efforts an excuse to  say, "If they can do it, why can't you?"  2. It creates and stokes resentment towards Asian Americans.  Ms. Chao wants to characterize her comments as about Chinese Americans, but in fact they will be applied to  all Asian Americans.  Her position as a public figure gives her ideas an aura of credibility, but the use of her  position as Cupertino Vice Mayor to promote her ideas is a misappropriation of power conferred on her by  that office.    So why should I care? Throughout my life I have been called both "C" words, the "G" word, and the "Jap" and  "Nip" words more times than I can count.  I have also very recently been called "Wuhan" by two different  people in separate instances here.  Anti‐Asian feelings are getting worse.  I do not want people like Ms. Chao  making things worse for our community.    Selecting Ms. Chao as the next mayor of Cupertino would be a tacit endorsement of Ms. Chao's divisive views  on race.  Ms. Chao cannot be the next mayor of Cupertino.  4   Thank you for  your consideration,  Randy Shingai    5 Cyrah Caburian From:Venkat Ranganathan <n.r.v@live.com> Sent:Sunday, November 14, 2021 3:53 PM To:City Council; Cupertino City Manager's Office Subject:Verizon installation of 5G tower Follow Up Flag:Follow up Flag Status:Completed 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.    As you may know, I have represented against the 5G tower installation in close proximity to the residential  structures (hardly 20ft from my bedroom).   There were attempts to rip apart the plants as part of laying the  pipe, destruction of one section of the park strip (which had plants).  In the last few months, we are seeing our  kids getting hurt in the bark and by comparing the bark that the contractor has spread on the park strip to the  one we had, it is very clear that this is not a bark that should be used in residential areas ‐ particularly on park  strips and walkways.       The barks are too long, sharp, and hard and they break through the shoe soles.  I would like the bark to be  cleared up and we can fill it with good quality ones that we had before.  Can you please ask the contractor to  do the cleanup of the barks      Thanks  Venkat      6 7 Cyrah Caburian From:Sean Hughes <jxseanhughes@gmail.com> Sent:Monday, November 15, 2021 9:07 PM To:City Clerk Subject:Comments for City Council Meeting 11/16/21 Follow Up Flag:Follow up Flag Status:Completed 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.    Hello,     I would like to submit the following comments pertaining to the first Study Session subject:    Regarding Topic 1 ‐ I am concerned about Vice‐Mayor Liang Chao's capabilities to assess AFFH obligations within the  Housing Element update process as her comments to CUSD parents reflect a gross‐misunderstanding of history and  racism.  Without an apology, an acknowledgement of how her statements were factually incorrect, and a demonstrable  commitment to show an updated understanding of principles key to the HE update process, I question her ability to  participate in the Housing Element Update, much less continue in her role as Vice‐Mayor or even as a City Council  member for Cupertino.      In her communications, she states that "The Chinese Exclusion Act was not even based on race, since only Chinese  laborers were excluded" and continues on to down‐play the discrimination of Chinese immigrants, saying "Certainly  Chinese people were discriminated against pretty badly in the past by some people. But then at the same time, there  are always good people who are welcome to immigrants in this country."  Both of these statements were rebuked and  reacted to by various community members, elected officials, and news outlets (see here) ‐ I join them in condemning her  statements, and find them hurtful, misguided, and deeply disappointing.    In response, she has backtracked her defense of the Chinese Exclusion Act, and pivots to criticism of Prop 16, saying:  "When a policy gives preference to some people and discriminates against others on the basis of “self‐identified” race,  that policy is racist. Period."    Putting aside that a law need not be 100% exclusionary to be "racist", or that having "some good people" doesn't  invalidate the history of oppression and violence against Asian immigrants, her latest comments reflect a lack of  understanding of history, racism in America, and the concept of "disparate impact". Even if a policy does not explicitly  say, or intend to, discriminate against protected groups (such as race, or gender identity) it is still unconstitutional if it  has a "discriminatory effect" on such groups (US Dept. of Justice Legal Manual). A core tenant of our current RHNA HE  update is directly derived from the AFFH rule‐making activity from HUD that relies on understanding the concept of  "disparate impact".    Chao's comments truly make her unfit from, at the very least, participating in the HE without advice of someone with a  better understanding of the AFFH components of this update. Moreover, her comments and latest defense of earlier  comments are disgraceful and severely call into question her ability to represent any members of the Cupertino  community.    Regards,  Sean Hughes  9 Cyrah Caburian From:Munisekar <msekar@gmail.com> Sent:Tuesday, November 16, 2021 10:05 AM To:City Council; Cupertino City Manager's Office; City Clerk Cc:Munisekaran Madhdhipatla Subject:Oral Communications: Smear Bloggers attacking Cupertino Residents and Elected Officials Follow Up Flag:Follow up Flag Status:Completed 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 Mayor & City Council,     My name is Muni Madhdhipatla and I am a Cupertino resident and Planning Commission member. I am writing this  email in my personal capacity as an involved community member and resident.    It is well known for well over the last 4 years that a certain group of smear bloggers acting on behalf of real estate  interests have been smear blogging about Cupertino residents and elected officials in an attempt to silence the voice of  the community. They cherry pick some sound bites from long discussion threads and post them on smear blogging sites  like the one below.    https://bittercupertino.wordpress.com/2018/10/29/thug‐eric‐schaefer‐cited‐for‐assault‐and‐battery/  https://bittercupertino.wordpress.com/2018/12/19/vindictive‐petty‐darcy‐paul/  https://bittercupertino.wordpress.com/2018/09/17/mayor‐darcy‐paul‐is‐an‐embarrassment/    Their actions are despicable and they hide behind the anonymity curtain of the internet. Since their tactics are not  working as evidenced by the election of the overwhelming majority of resident focused city council members, they are  now embarking on character assasination of those elected members through social media outlets.    I learned that these despicable characters are seeking a public apology from Vice Mayor Liang Chao for something she  did not say. I believe Vice Mayor Liang Chao is one of the finest elected office bearers we have and I fully support her  stance. She should NOT be apologizing for something she did not say.    On the other hand, I ask the city council to reprimand and demand from these smear blogging entities that  1. They disclose their financial sources to continue their activities.  2. They register as a lobbying group as per Cupertino lobbying ordinance.  3. They tender a public apology to the Cupertino community at large and the elected officials.    Thank you.    Muni Madhdhipatla  Cupertino Resident.      10 Cyrah Caburian From:Kirsten Squarcia Sent:Tuesday, November 16, 2021 11:00 AM To:Jun Ma Cc:City Clerk Subject:RE: Support Liangfang Chao Follow Up Flag:Follow up Flag Status:Completed Good morning (Council bcc'd on this email), Your comments have been received and will be included in the public  record.     Regards,    Kirsten Squarcia  City Clerk  City Manager's Office  KirstenS@cupertino.org  (408) 777‐3225    ‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐  From: Jun Ma <junma16@gmail.com>  Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2021 10:17 AM  To: City Clerk <CityClerk@cupertino.org>  Subject: Support Liangfang Chao    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.      As the residence of Cupertino, I really appreciated what Liangfang has been done for the city, she is a wonderful vice  mayor . And Please put my email in public record. Thanks    Sent from my iPhone    11 Cyrah Caburian From:Ping Ding <dingyiyi@hotmail.com> Sent:Tuesday, November 16, 2021 11:27 AM To:City Clerk; City Council Subject:Support our city council and Make our city a better place to live! Follow Up Flag:Follow up Flag Status:Completed 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,    Some complains that Mayor Liangfang Zhao made wrong statement on Critical Race Theory and the Chinese  Exclusion. I believe there is misunderstanding and wrong interpretation on Mayor Liangfang Zhao.  She has  already clarified her position on the issue. She doesn't need to make any apologize on the issue.     Mayor Zhang has made great contribution on our city and we all benefit on her effort. I really appreciate  Mayor Zhao's hard work on our community.    I don't want to see any one enlarge the none sense issue on Mayor Zhao and damage our city council's hard  work to the city.    Thanks,  Ping    Please put my email in public record!   12 Cyrah Caburian From:Grace Chin <gchin30@gmail.com> Sent:Tuesday, November 16, 2021 11:30 AM To:City Clerk; City Council Subject:We are so lucky to have Liang Chao here Follow Up Flag:Follow up Flag Status:Completed 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 Council members,     For elected officials, I care what they did more than what they talked about. Thank you Liang as a  Cupertino City Council member leading us to defeat Prop. 16 last year. Prop. 16 is a real  racist policy to give preferential treatment based on  race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin in public em ploym ent, public education, and public contracting. As an elected o fficial, Liang Chao could hide like most people did. But she didn't. On the co ntrary, she courageously led us to defeat it.     I will never fo rg e t her contribution to make Califo rn ia a real equal state fo r everyone. Please put my em ail in the public re co rd .    Sincerely,  Grace  13 Cyrah Caburian From:Grace Chin <gchin30@gmail.com> Sent:Tuesday, November 16, 2021 11:30 AM To:City Clerk; City Council Subject:We are so lucky to have Liang Chao here Follow Up Flag:Follow up Flag Status:Completed 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 Council members,     For elected officials, I care what they did more than what they talked about. Thank you Liang as a  Cupertino City Council member leading us to defeat Prop. 16 last year. Prop. 16 is a real  racist policy to give preferential treatment based on  race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin in public em ploym ent, public education, and public contracting. As an elected o fficial, Liang Chao could hide like most people did. But she didn't. On the co ntrary, she courageously led us to defeat it.     I will never fo rg e t her contribution to make Califo rn ia a real equal state fo r everyone. Please put my em ail in the public re co rd .    Sincerely,  Grace  14 Cyrah Caburian From:J Shearin <shearin.jen@gmail.com> Sent:Tuesday, November 16, 2021 12:55 PM To:City Clerk; City Council Subject:Urge Council to require apology and retraction of comments by Vice Mayor regarding Chinese Exclusion Act Follow Up Flag:Follow up Flag Status:Completed 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 Mayor Paul and Councilmembers, I’ve recently read—as have many of our residents—about the comments made by Vice Mayor Chao in a CUSD parents forum about the Chinese Exclusion Act not being racist. I ask today that she publicly apologize and retract her comments on this issue. If Vice Mayor Chao had stated that she was in error, and apologized for the statements, instead of saying it “was taken out of context”, I would not need to write this letter. (We all make mistakes.) I’ve read the full post she wrote on November 5, so I have the context. The comments are still completely in error even with the added context. As a public figure, with significant power both to shape our dialogue and to create policy in Cupertino, she has a great responsibility—much greater than a typical resident—to speak thoughtfully, not wantonly. As a City Councilmember and our Vice Mayor, i.e. one of a handful of elected representatives of our city, she should exemplify the best of Cupertino, including being against racism in all forms, past or present. I urge you today to make this apology and retraction a priority. Only by clearly and frankly acknowledging our past can we hope to make a real difference in the future. Best Wishes, Jennifer Shearin 15 Cyrah Caburian From:Liana Crabtree <lianacrabtree@yahoo.com> Sent:Tuesday, November 16, 2021 1:06 PM To:Darcy Paul; Liang Chao; Kitty Moore; Hung Wei; Jon Robert Willey Cc:City Clerk Subject:public comment, 11/16/2021 City Council Meeting, in defense of Freedom of Speech Follow Up Flag:Follow up Flag Status:Completed 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.    Honorable Mayor Paul, Vice Mayor Chao, and Council Members Moore, Wei, and Willey:   Please include my letter as written communications for the 11/16/2021 Council meeting, public comment agenda item. Earlier this month, subscribers to a community-led email list that addresses matters of interest in the local public schools received posts that discussed now-controversial Critical Race Theory (CRT) and other topics related to ethnic studies curriculum and diversity/equity/inclusion education. Vice Mayor Liang Chao, participating as herself and in no way asserting to represent the City of Cupertino through her comments, was a prominent researcher and poster to these CRT-related threads. At some point, the topic of immigration exclusion act laws were introduced in one of the threads, with a clear intent to understand these laws: what are they? why were they introduced? what was their impact on people of the past? what is their impact on people living today? what lessons about them are important to share with young people as we prepare them to be responsible, engaged, compassionate, and productive adult members of society? It is in the spirit of addressing the questions above that Liang Chao began posting her research and thoughts about the 1882 Chinese Exclusion Act. Soon after—and in direct violation of established codes of conduct for participation on the email list— an individual captured a snippet of one of Liang Chao's many posts and broadcasted the captured bit on social media to assert through shaming that Liang Chao’s comments were something that required an apology. Post launch of the accusatory social media comment, another community member asserts on the schools’ email list that Liang Chao owes the community a public apology for her posts. Multiple times on the schools' email list the individual calls for Liang Chao to publicly apologize for her posts for reasons never explained. As a result of Liang Chao's investigative posts on the schools’ email list about the role and impact of the 1882 Chinese Exclusion Act, I was prompted to learn more about the dark era in our nation's 16 history when Chinese exclusion laws—including but in not limited to the 1882 Chinese Exclusion Act—were enacted and why their impacts are relevant for all of us today. It was the post where Liang Chao wrestles with the significance of the 1882 Chinese Exclusion Act that prompted some participants on the schools email list to publish posts on social media to condemn Liang Chao for her comments and prompted other participants to be inspired to learn more. I learned from Liang Chao's posts and from her example to seek the truth through research and through interrogation of ideas and "commonly held beliefs" about immigration exclusion laws. In my own efforts to learn more, I watched the excellent 2018 documentary American Experience: the Chinese Exclusion Act. The 2 hour 40 minute production is an intense audio video timeline of Chinese-to-US immigration history told by a dozen or so historians and punctuated by first-person accounts, legal decisions, poetry, and archival photos. The work could be mined for days for commentary, but I will focus on 4 key points from the documentary that are most relevant to Liang Chao’s recent comments about immigration exclusion laws: 1) Immigration exclusion laws were first applied to Chinese immigrants and were later broadened to apply to “all Asians”. These 19th and 20th Century immigration exclusion laws are unknown to or poorly understood by most US residents alive today. 2) It is common to conflate one specific law, the 1882 Chinese Exclusion Act, with the provisions and impacts of scores of local, State, and Federal laws that came before and after that when taken together severely limited the civil rights and economic opportunities of Chinese and Chinese- American women, children, men, and later, all Asian-appearing individuals residing in the United States. The 1882 Chinese Exclusion Act specifically applied to male non-merchant workers seeking to immigrate to the US. However, the totality of the Chinese exclusion laws inflicted varied and specific restrictions on a much broader group of people. 3) Chinese exclusion laws established the US as a gatekeeping country. Forevermore, “send me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free…” no longer applies without an asterisk. When we consider the implications today of immigration exclusion acts, beginning with 19th and 20th Century Chinese exclusion laws, we must reconcile the US’s reassuring “land of opportunity” narrative with the reality of immigration gatekeeping then and now. 4) Chinese immigrants and native-born residents subjected to Chinese exclusion laws fought back. Despite being denied rights to naturalize or claim native-born citizenship and voting rights, they organized; wrote letters to elected officials and newspapers to protest unjust treatment under the law; held strikes; filed many, many lawsuits; and engaged in acts of mass civil disobedience, especially when yet another exclusion act was introduced that was to require Asian-appearing individuals to register for and carry identity cards (domestic passports) that no other groups were required to carry. And, despite very long odds against success, sometimes the determined civil rights protestors prevailed. Anyone with a Santa Clara County Library District card or ecard can view American Experience: the Chinese Exclusion Act (2018) using the Kanopy app available on the SCCLD website (https://sccld.org/emovies-tv-emusic/). Finally, at the end of this letter, I have included Liang Chao’s reply to one reporter who requested the posts she shared on the schools’ email list that included references to Chinese exclusion laws. Liang Chao shared only her posts with the reporter and with subscribers to the schools’ email list. 17 Whether someone chooses to agree with her research and analyses or not, I believe these posts illustrate that Liang Chao is determined to understand a complex and emotionally charged immigration history that has implications for today’s residents and citizens of Chinese and Asian descent. And, Chinese exclusion laws have implications for everyone as we consider the consequences of today’s gatekeeping immigration policies that prioritize US entry for highly educated individuals and for high net worth individuals who are prepared to invest their wealth in US real estate. I hope you will join me in respecting Liang Chao’s rights to Freedom of Speech and reject claims from individuals asserting that she must apologize for exercising her Free Speech rights. Sincerely, Liana Crabtree Cupertino resident RESOURCES Review of the documentary American Experience: the Chinese Exclusion Act (2018): https://ageofthegeek.org/2018/06/02/pbs-american-experience-the-chinese-exclusion-act- %e2%9c%ae%e2%9c%ae%e2%9c%ae%e2%9c%ae%e2%9c%ae/ <START, Liang Chao’s reply to a reporter regarding posts to a schools’ email list in November 2021 referencing Chinese exclusion laws and Critical Race Theory> ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Liang-Fang Chao Date: Sun, Nov 7, 2021 at 6:18 PM Subject: Fwd: What exactly is CRT? To: Patch Reporter Enclosed is the context of the email thread when I brought up the Chinese Exclusion Act. The portion that's quoted in the tweet is in response to a comment by another parent. I would rather not to share someone else's comment with a reporter. without their permission So, I am only including mine. I brought the topic up in the context of trying to understand Critical Race Theory, which would examine a historic event through ONLY the racial lens. As a result, the Chinese Exclusion Act was only viewed as a racist act. But it was more than that. There were multiple historic aspects towards why the Democratic Party in California pushed for the Chinese Exclusion Act at the time. The main reason was not "racist" since the entire Asian race was not excluded. The main reason was to protect domestic laborers who thought those Chinese laborers with lower wages were taking their jobs. Thus, the bill text of the Chinese Exclusion Act excluded only Chinese laborers, not all Chinese. And they did not exclude laborers from other Asain countries, such as Japan, Korea, Indonesia etc. The Chinese Exclusion Act was enacted because of a fear for their job security by domestic workers and also a prejudice towards Chinese people, rather than all Asians. And it was also a fear of 18 foreigners and the unknown. People at the time didn't understand oriental culture and thus they fear it and try to resort to negative stereotypes.. I think racism is when one discriminates against another of a different race and thinks the other race is inferior. But to the contrary, the Chinese laborers were excluded because they were too good at their jobs. Is that racism? Or just fear of foreigners who are better than us? The prejudice and stereotypes faced by Chinese is very different from other Asians. We are still treated as foreigners more than other Asians. The FBI and Homeland Security still target Chinese American scholars and engineers more than people from other countries or races TODAY. What Chinese Americans face is not only racism, but also xenophobia and also a specific kind of phobia against China, another country. My point is that racism alone is not enough to explain the kind of prejudice Chinese Americans suffer daily in the workplace and on the street. Critical Race Theory is an academic theory which examines a society through ONLY the racial lens, like an X-ray, so it does not see all the other complex aspects that form a policy or a society. To understand history, we must understand multiple historic aspects of those historic events in their historic context. Thus, Critical Race Theory is insufficient for understanding history in K-12 schools. That was the reason I brought up the Chinese Exclusion Act in the first place. ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Liang-Fang Chao Date: Fri, Nov 5, 2021 at 2:41 PM Subject: Re: What exactly is CRT? To: Parent Group And the Chinese Exclusion Act was not even based on race, since only Chinese laborers are excluded. It was really a labor issue where American laborers wish to keep cheaper Chinese laborers out, for good reasons. We are doing similar things today, through the H1 visa process. We don't want to give work visas to people that will take American jobs. At that time, laborers from Japan, Philipino or India were not excluded at all. And Chinese students and anyone who is not a laborer would still get permission to enter the US. (I went to read the original text of the Chinese Exclusion Act, of course, to find out.) But when a scholar would only examine an event through the racial lens, they would view the Chinese Exclusion Act through the lens that it excluded some Chinese, who are people of color. Thus, it is racism. Well... the historical context is important if we want to pass judgement on historic events. At that time, there were certainly a lot of negative stereotypes of Chinese people. And there were people who simply hate Chinese and printed some terrible comics etc. But at the same time, there were people who value a sustained relationship with China and support more interaction with Chinese people. This is true in almost every historic moment. Do we let those bad people define an entire group of people and an entire historic moment? Or do we look at the big picture and consider multiple perspectives and then have a holistic view? 19 And back to education, for our children, do we want them to view life by focusing on the worst moments and let it define their life and be miserable? Or do we want them to focus on the positives and on what good people did to each other and be happy and be hopeful about life? Then, we could ask ourselves again. Should curriculum materials influenced by CRT be used in K-12 education? Why and why not? On Fri, Nov 5, 2021 at 2:32 PM Liang-Fang Chao wrote: The main tenets of CRT are what most CRT scholars agree on. But they vary on other issues too. Besides those CRT scholars in academia, there are others who are inspired by CRT, like Kendi, the author of White Fragility, etc. The serious CRT scholars do not consider them CRT. But they are definitely a popularized version of CRT that is infiltrating companies, media and schools. So, if an author calls out colorblindness as racist, the ideology of this person definitely is influenced by CRT If an author advocates for present discrimination in order to fix past discrimination, as Kendi does, this author definitely is influenced by CRT Prop 16 attempts to legalize racial discrimination by the state government, or nicely called "racial preference" (which prefers some races over other races). Thus, many Prop 16 proponents are people who subscribe to the CRT beliefs. They believe in fighting against racism by more racial discrimitation, just against whatever group they deem "not preferred". This is why <group member> brought up Prop. 16 as an example of CRT. Thus, if a teacher uses a curriculum that teaches colorblindness is racist and we should not treat everyone equally regardless of race. Some parents would consider that material CRT. But I guess some others would argue, but that's not CRT. Some call SAT racist simply because the outcome is not evenly distributed among different races. Meritocracy has been called "racist" by some authors, inspired by CRT too. This is because CRT advocates the outcome is predominantly influenced by one's privilege, which comes from their race. The conventional wisdom of hard work or even grit is looked down by CRT advocates since they consider them "victim-blaming". But the traditional life wisdom of empowerment is to ignore what we cannot control, our disadvantages, shortcomings or obstacles, and to focus on what we can control, which is our own effort to overcome obstacles. So, the CRT-inspired authors would focus on blaming others, those who have privileges or advantages and those obstacles and emphasize on sharing lived experiences of being discriminated against. For Ethnic Studies, for example, every Chinese I talked to wished the strength of Chinese culture traits and achievement of Chinese American immigrants would be covered. But no. The state model curriculum, created by a committee with mostly CRT scholars, focuses on how much Chinese has been discriminated against, the Chinese Exclusion Act etc. But we, Chinese, want both the ugly, and 20 the good, to be covered and especially the good, in the K-12 education. We don't want to be portrayed as victims, suffering from some oppression, when most of us have escaped another worse oppressive society in our own country to come to the U.S. for a better life for the next generation. That version of the Ethnic Studies is in fact called "Critical Ethnic Studies", which focuses more on analyzing the impact of race, rather than on ethnic culture and their people. On Thu, Nov 4, 2021 at 11:03 PM Liang-Fang Chao wrote: I thought we should at least try to understand what is considered CRT (Critical Race Theory), since this term comes up a lot. I never trust the descriptions in either left or right wing media, as you know, since each side has its bias I thought Britannica's description should be more accurate. Critical Race Theory - from Britannica https://www.britannica.com/topic/critical-race-theory (Text below are all quoted from Britannica. Text within square brackets [are my comments) 1. The social construction of race critical race theory (CRT), intellectual and social movement and loosely organized framework of legal analysis based on the premise that race is not a natural, biologically grounded feature of physically distinct subgroups of human beings but a socially constructed (culturally invented) category that is used to oppress and exploit people of colour. 2. the normality of racism [=> systemic racism, structural racism.] Critical race theorists hold that racism is inherent in the law and legal institutions of the United States insofar as they function to create and maintain social, economic, and political inequalities between whites and nonwhites, especially African Americans." "Many instances of racist behaviour directed at people of colour take the form of “microaggressions,” which are verbal or behavioral slights, generally subtle and often unintentional or unconscious, that communicate a stereotype or negative attitude toward a person of colour and thus indicate an implicit bias based on race. (Microaggressions may also be directed at members of other oppressed or marginalized groups, such as women and LGBTQ persons.) 3. Interest convergence "Third, owing to what CRT scholars call “interest convergence” or “material determinism,” legal advances (or setbacks) for people of colour tend to serve the interests of dominant white groups. Thus, the racial hierarchy that characterizes American society may be unaffected or even reinforced by ostensible improvements in the legal status of oppressed or exploited people." 4. differential racialization Fourth, members of minority groups periodically undergo “differential racialization,” or the 21 attribution to them of varying sets of negative stereotypes, again depending on the needs or interests of whites. Such stereotypes are often reflected in popular culture (e.g., in movies and television) and literature as well as in the news media, and they have even influenced the content of history curricula in public schools. ["Differential racialisation calls attention to the ways in which the dominant society racialises different minority groups in different ways at different times in response to shifting needs." "Example: WWII the image of Japanese Americans was created to justify putting them in Internment Camps."] 5. intersectionality Fifth, according to the thesis of “intersectionality” or “antiessentialism,” no individual can be adequately identified by membership in a single group. An African American person, for example, may also identify as a woman, a lesbian, a feminist, a Christian, and so on. 6. voice of colour [so-called "lived experience"] Sixth, and finally, the “voice of colour” thesis holds that people of colour are uniquely qualified to speak on behalf of other members of their group (or groups) regarding the forms and effects of racism. This consensus has led to the growth of the “legal storytelling” movement, which argues that the self-expressed views of victims of racism and other forms of oppression provide essential insight into the nature of the legal system. Academic and political criticism of critical race theory Various aspects of CRT have been criticized by legal scholars and jurists from across the political spectrum. Many critics have faulted CRT for its apparent embrace of an incoherent, postmodernist-inspired skepticism of objectivity and truth, as evidenced in applications of the “voice of colour” thesis and other discussions in the CRT literature. Others have accused critical race theorists of undervaluing the traditional liberal ideals of neutrality, equality, and fairness in the law and legal procedures and of unreasonably spurning the notion of objective standards of merit in academia and in public and private employment, instead interpreting any racial inequity or imbalance in legal, academic, or economic outcomes as proof of institutional racism and as grounds for directly imposing racially equitable outcomes in those realms. In a similar vein, critical race theorists have also been charged with unfairly treating any external criticism of their approach, however well-meaning, as evidence of (latent) racism. =========== My comments: As a "theory" to analyze history, CRT has its value. Like X-ray, it highlights the bones, but it does not provide a full spectrum of understanding of the human body, since the soft issues are all missed. Now, should CRT or anything inspired by CRT be taught standalone in K-12 schools without the proper context? Then, should you walk around with an X-ray glass and should your child walk around with an X-ray glass without understanding what the X-ray glass is for and what it highlights and ignores? As you can see from this Britanniaca description of CRT, some terms that have become "common" recently such as microaggression, systemic racism, intersectionality, lived experience, all come from CRT. And many others created other works "inspired by CRT". 22 Do they belong in K-12 classrooms? Some CRT-inspired authors are proposing perspectives, views, theories of one person, not peer reviewed at all by other scholars, and many others object to those perspectives, views and theories. Do they belong in K-12 classrooms? NOTE: You might have noticed that I use the term "CRT advocates": rather than "Critical Race Theorists" since most of the authors of popular CRT-inspired books are not "Critical Race Theorists". In fact, some CRT scholars look down on those off-shoots of CRT since they don't think they have learned CRT fully, And they are unhappy that a lot of bad press is due to those views by the off-shoot CRT advocates. (Well... I watch videos of CRT scholars discussing CRT... since I want to be sure that I understand CRT from the people who advocate it.) Liang <END, Liang Chao’s reply to a reporter regarding posts to a schools’ email list in November 2021 referencing Chinese exclusion laws and Critical Race Theory> ◦ ○ ◎ ○ ◦ vax.sccgov.org ◦ ○ ◎ ○ ◦ For assistance in Español, Tiếng Việt, 中文 or Tagalog, please call the Advice Line at 1-866-870- 7725. ◦ ○ ◎ ○ ◦ County of Santa Clara COVID-19 Updates and Quick Links ◦ ○ ◎ ○ ◦ 23 Cyrah Caburian From:Liana Crabtree <lianacrabtree@yahoo.com> Sent:Tuesday, November 16, 2021 1:06 PM To:Darcy Paul; Liang Chao; Kitty Moore; Hung Wei; Jon Robert Willey Cc:City Clerk Subject:public comment, 11/16/2021 City Council Meeting, in defense of Freedom of Speech Follow Up Flag:Follow up Flag Status:Completed 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.    Honorable Mayor Paul, Vice Mayor Chao, and Council Members Moore, Wei, and Willey:   Please include my letter as written communications for the 11/16/2021 Council meeting, public comment agenda item. Earlier this month, subscribers to a community-led email list that addresses matters of interest in the local public schools received posts that discussed now-controversial Critical Race Theory (CRT) and other topics related to ethnic studies curriculum and diversity/equity/inclusion education. Vice Mayor Liang Chao, participating as herself and in no way asserting to represent the City of Cupertino through her comments, was a prominent researcher and poster to these CRT-related threads. At some point, the topic of immigration exclusion act laws were introduced in one of the threads, with a clear intent to understand these laws: what are they? why were they introduced? what was their impact on people of the past? what is their impact on people living today? what lessons about them are important to share with young people as we prepare them to be responsible, engaged, compassionate, and productive adult members of society? It is in the spirit of addressing the questions above that Liang Chao began posting her research and thoughts about the 1882 Chinese Exclusion Act. Soon after—and in direct violation of established codes of conduct for participation on the email list— an individual captured a snippet of one of Liang Chao's many posts and broadcasted the captured bit on social media to assert through shaming that Liang Chao’s comments were something that required an apology. Post launch of the accusatory social media comment, another community member asserts on the schools’ email list that Liang Chao owes the community a public apology for her posts. Multiple times on the schools' email list the individual calls for Liang Chao to publicly apologize for her posts for reasons never explained. As a result of Liang Chao's investigative posts on the schools’ email list about the role and impact of the 1882 Chinese Exclusion Act, I was prompted to learn more about the dark era in our nation's 24 history when Chinese exclusion laws—including but in not limited to the 1882 Chinese Exclusion Act—were enacted and why their impacts are relevant for all of us today. It was the post where Liang Chao wrestles with the significance of the 1882 Chinese Exclusion Act that prompted some participants on the schools email list to publish posts on social media to condemn Liang Chao for her comments and prompted other participants to be inspired to learn more. I learned from Liang Chao's posts and from her example to seek the truth through research and through interrogation of ideas and "commonly held beliefs" about immigration exclusion laws. In my own efforts to learn more, I watched the excellent 2018 documentary American Experience: the Chinese Exclusion Act. The 2 hour 40 minute production is an intense audio video timeline of Chinese-to-US immigration history told by a dozen or so historians and punctuated by first-person accounts, legal decisions, poetry, and archival photos. The work could be mined for days for commentary, but I will focus on 4 key points from the documentary that are most relevant to Liang Chao’s recent comments about immigration exclusion laws: 1) Immigration exclusion laws were first applied to Chinese immigrants and were later broadened to apply to “all Asians”. These 19th and 20th Century immigration exclusion laws are unknown to or poorly understood by most US residents alive today. 2) It is common to conflate one specific law, the 1882 Chinese Exclusion Act, with the provisions and impacts of scores of local, State, and Federal laws that came before and after that when taken together severely limited the civil rights and economic opportunities of Chinese and Chinese- American women, children, men, and later, all Asian-appearing individuals residing in the United States. The 1882 Chinese Exclusion Act specifically applied to male non-merchant workers seeking to immigrate to the US. However, the totality of the Chinese exclusion laws inflicted varied and specific restrictions on a much broader group of people. 3) Chinese exclusion laws established the US as a gatekeeping country. Forevermore, “send me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free…” no longer applies without an asterisk. When we consider the implications today of immigration exclusion acts, beginning with 19th and 20th Century Chinese exclusion laws, we must reconcile the US’s reassuring “land of opportunity” narrative with the reality of immigration gatekeeping then and now. 4) Chinese immigrants and native-born residents subjected to Chinese exclusion laws fought back. Despite being denied rights to naturalize or claim native-born citizenship and voting rights, they organized; wrote letters to elected officials and newspapers to protest unjust treatment under the law; held strikes; filed many, many lawsuits; and engaged in acts of mass civil disobedience, especially when yet another exclusion act was introduced that was to require Asian-appearing individuals to register for and carry identity cards (domestic passports) that no other groups were required to carry. And, despite very long odds against success, sometimes the determined civil rights protestors prevailed. Anyone with a Santa Clara County Library District card or ecard can view American Experience: the Chinese Exclusion Act (2018) using the Kanopy app available on the SCCLD website (https://sccld.org/emovies-tv-emusic/). Finally, at the end of this letter, I have included Liang Chao’s reply to one reporter who requested the posts she shared on the schools’ email list that included references to Chinese exclusion laws. Liang Chao shared only her posts with the reporter and with subscribers to the schools’ email list. 25 Whether someone chooses to agree with her research and analyses or not, I believe these posts illustrate that Liang Chao is determined to understand a complex and emotionally charged immigration history that has implications for today’s residents and citizens of Chinese and Asian descent. And, Chinese exclusion laws have implications for everyone as we consider the consequences of today’s gatekeeping immigration policies that prioritize US entry for highly educated individuals and for high net worth individuals who are prepared to invest their wealth in US real estate. I hope you will join me in respecting Liang Chao’s rights to Freedom of Speech and reject claims from individuals asserting that she must apologize for exercising her Free Speech rights. Sincerely, Liana Crabtree Cupertino resident RESOURCES Review of the documentary American Experience: the Chinese Exclusion Act (2018): https://ageofthegeek.org/2018/06/02/pbs-american-experience-the-chinese-exclusion-act- %e2%9c%ae%e2%9c%ae%e2%9c%ae%e2%9c%ae%e2%9c%ae/ <START, Liang Chao’s reply to a reporter regarding posts to a schools’ email list in November 2021 referencing Chinese exclusion laws and Critical Race Theory> ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Liang-Fang Chao Date: Sun, Nov 7, 2021 at 6:18 PM Subject: Fwd: What exactly is CRT? To: Patch Reporter Enclosed is the context of the email thread when I brought up the Chinese Exclusion Act. The portion that's quoted in the tweet is in response to a comment by another parent. I would rather not to share someone else's comment with a reporter. without their permission So, I am only including mine. I brought the topic up in the context of trying to understand Critical Race Theory, which would examine a historic event through ONLY the racial lens. As a result, the Chinese Exclusion Act was only viewed as a racist act. But it was more than that. There were multiple historic aspects towards why the Democratic Party in California pushed for the Chinese Exclusion Act at the time. The main reason was not "racist" since the entire Asian race was not excluded. The main reason was to protect domestic laborers who thought those Chinese laborers with lower wages were taking their jobs. Thus, the bill text of the Chinese Exclusion Act excluded only Chinese laborers, not all Chinese. And they did not exclude laborers from other Asain countries, such as Japan, Korea, Indonesia etc. The Chinese Exclusion Act was enacted because of a fear for their job security by domestic workers and also a prejudice towards Chinese people, rather than all Asians. And it was also a fear of 26 foreigners and the unknown. People at the time didn't understand oriental culture and thus they fear it and try to resort to negative stereotypes.. I think racism is when one discriminates against another of a different race and thinks the other race is inferior. But to the contrary, the Chinese laborers were excluded because they were too good at their jobs. Is that racism? Or just fear of foreigners who are better than us? The prejudice and stereotypes faced by Chinese is very different from other Asians. We are still treated as foreigners more than other Asians. The FBI and Homeland Security still target Chinese American scholars and engineers more than people from other countries or races TODAY. What Chinese Americans face is not only racism, but also xenophobia and also a specific kind of phobia against China, another country. My point is that racism alone is not enough to explain the kind of prejudice Chinese Americans suffer daily in the workplace and on the street. Critical Race Theory is an academic theory which examines a society through ONLY the racial lens, like an X-ray, so it does not see all the other complex aspects that form a policy or a society. To understand history, we must understand multiple historic aspects of those historic events in their historic context. Thus, Critical Race Theory is insufficient for understanding history in K-12 schools. That was the reason I brought up the Chinese Exclusion Act in the first place. ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Liang-Fang Chao Date: Fri, Nov 5, 2021 at 2:41 PM Subject: Re: What exactly is CRT? To: Parent Group And the Chinese Exclusion Act was not even based on race, since only Chinese laborers are excluded. It was really a labor issue where American laborers wish to keep cheaper Chinese laborers out, for good reasons. We are doing similar things today, through the H1 visa process. We don't want to give work visas to people that will take American jobs. At that time, laborers from Japan, Philipino or India were not excluded at all. And Chinese students and anyone who is not a laborer would still get permission to enter the US. (I went to read the original text of the Chinese Exclusion Act, of course, to find out.) But when a scholar would only examine an event through the racial lens, they would view the Chinese Exclusion Act through the lens that it excluded some Chinese, who are people of color. Thus, it is racism. Well... the historical context is important if we want to pass judgement on historic events. At that time, there were certainly a lot of negative stereotypes of Chinese people. And there were people who simply hate Chinese and printed some terrible comics etc. But at the same time, there were people who value a sustained relationship with China and support more interaction with Chinese people. This is true in almost every historic moment. Do we let those bad people define an entire group of people and an entire historic moment? Or do we look at the big picture and consider multiple perspectives and then have a holistic view? 27 And back to education, for our children, do we want them to view life by focusing on the worst moments and let it define their life and be miserable? Or do we want them to focus on the positives and on what good people did to each other and be happy and be hopeful about life? Then, we could ask ourselves again. Should curriculum materials influenced by CRT be used in K-12 education? Why and why not? On Fri, Nov 5, 2021 at 2:32 PM Liang-Fang Chao wrote: The main tenets of CRT are what most CRT scholars agree on. But they vary on other issues too. Besides those CRT scholars in academia, there are others who are inspired by CRT, like Kendi, the author of White Fragility, etc. The serious CRT scholars do not consider them CRT. But they are definitely a popularized version of CRT that is infiltrating companies, media and schools. So, if an author calls out colorblindness as racist, the ideology of this person definitely is influenced by CRT If an author advocates for present discrimination in order to fix past discrimination, as Kendi does, this author definitely is influenced by CRT Prop 16 attempts to legalize racial discrimination by the state government, or nicely called "racial preference" (which prefers some races over other races). Thus, many Prop 16 proponents are people who subscribe to the CRT beliefs. They believe in fighting against racism by more racial discrimitation, just against whatever group they deem "not preferred". This is why <group member> brought up Prop. 16 as an example of CRT. Thus, if a teacher uses a curriculum that teaches colorblindness is racist and we should not treat everyone equally regardless of race. Some parents would consider that material CRT. But I guess some others would argue, but that's not CRT. Some call SAT racist simply because the outcome is not evenly distributed among different races. Meritocracy has been called "racist" by some authors, inspired by CRT too. This is because CRT advocates the outcome is predominantly influenced by one's privilege, which comes from their race. The conventional wisdom of hard work or even grit is looked down by CRT advocates since they consider them "victim-blaming". But the traditional life wisdom of empowerment is to ignore what we cannot control, our disadvantages, shortcomings or obstacles, and to focus on what we can control, which is our own effort to overcome obstacles. So, the CRT-inspired authors would focus on blaming others, those who have privileges or advantages and those obstacles and emphasize on sharing lived experiences of being discriminated against. For Ethnic Studies, for example, every Chinese I talked to wished the strength of Chinese culture traits and achievement of Chinese American immigrants would be covered. But no. The state model curriculum, created by a committee with mostly CRT scholars, focuses on how much Chinese has been discriminated against, the Chinese Exclusion Act etc. But we, Chinese, want both the ugly, and 28 the good, to be covered and especially the good, in the K-12 education. We don't want to be portrayed as victims, suffering from some oppression, when most of us have escaped another worse oppressive society in our own country to come to the U.S. for a better life for the next generation. That version of the Ethnic Studies is in fact called "Critical Ethnic Studies", which focuses more on analyzing the impact of race, rather than on ethnic culture and their people. On Thu, Nov 4, 2021 at 11:03 PM Liang-Fang Chao wrote: I thought we should at least try to understand what is considered CRT (Critical Race Theory), since this term comes up a lot. I never trust the descriptions in either left or right wing media, as you know, since each side has its bias I thought Britannica's description should be more accurate. Critical Race Theory - from Britannica https://www.britannica.com/topic/critical-race-theory (Text below are all quoted from Britannica. Text within square brackets [are my comments) 1. The social construction of race critical race theory (CRT), intellectual and social movement and loosely organized framework of legal analysis based on the premise that race is not a natural, biologically grounded feature of physically distinct subgroups of human beings but a socially constructed (culturally invented) category that is used to oppress and exploit people of colour. 2. the normality of racism [=> systemic racism, structural racism.] Critical race theorists hold that racism is inherent in the law and legal institutions of the United States insofar as they function to create and maintain social, economic, and political inequalities between whites and nonwhites, especially African Americans." "Many instances of racist behaviour directed at people of colour take the form of “microaggressions,” which are verbal or behavioral slights, generally subtle and often unintentional or unconscious, that communicate a stereotype or negative attitude toward a person of colour and thus indicate an implicit bias based on race. (Microaggressions may also be directed at members of other oppressed or marginalized groups, such as women and LGBTQ persons.) 3. Interest convergence "Third, owing to what CRT scholars call “interest convergence” or “material determinism,” legal advances (or setbacks) for people of colour tend to serve the interests of dominant white groups. Thus, the racial hierarchy that characterizes American society may be unaffected or even reinforced by ostensible improvements in the legal status of oppressed or exploited people." 4. differential racialization Fourth, members of minority groups periodically undergo “differential racialization,” or the 29 attribution to them of varying sets of negative stereotypes, again depending on the needs or interests of whites. Such stereotypes are often reflected in popular culture (e.g., in movies and television) and literature as well as in the news media, and they have even influenced the content of history curricula in public schools. ["Differential racialisation calls attention to the ways in which the dominant society racialises different minority groups in different ways at different times in response to shifting needs." "Example: WWII the image of Japanese Americans was created to justify putting them in Internment Camps."] 5. intersectionality Fifth, according to the thesis of “intersectionality” or “antiessentialism,” no individual can be adequately identified by membership in a single group. An African American person, for example, may also identify as a woman, a lesbian, a feminist, a Christian, and so on. 6. voice of colour [so-called "lived experience"] Sixth, and finally, the “voice of colour” thesis holds that people of colour are uniquely qualified to speak on behalf of other members of their group (or groups) regarding the forms and effects of racism. This consensus has led to the growth of the “legal storytelling” movement, which argues that the self-expressed views of victims of racism and other forms of oppression provide essential insight into the nature of the legal system. Academic and political criticism of critical race theory Various aspects of CRT have been criticized by legal scholars and jurists from across the political spectrum. Many critics have faulted CRT for its apparent embrace of an incoherent, postmodernist-inspired skepticism of objectivity and truth, as evidenced in applications of the “voice of colour” thesis and other discussions in the CRT literature. Others have accused critical race theorists of undervaluing the traditional liberal ideals of neutrality, equality, and fairness in the law and legal procedures and of unreasonably spurning the notion of objective standards of merit in academia and in public and private employment, instead interpreting any racial inequity or imbalance in legal, academic, or economic outcomes as proof of institutional racism and as grounds for directly imposing racially equitable outcomes in those realms. In a similar vein, critical race theorists have also been charged with unfairly treating any external criticism of their approach, however well-meaning, as evidence of (latent) racism. =========== My comments: As a "theory" to analyze history, CRT has its value. Like X-ray, it highlights the bones, but it does not provide a full spectrum of understanding of the human body, since the soft issues are all missed. Now, should CRT or anything inspired by CRT be taught standalone in K-12 schools without the proper context? Then, should you walk around with an X-ray glass and should your child walk around with an X-ray glass without understanding what the X-ray glass is for and what it highlights and ignores? As you can see from this Britanniaca description of CRT, some terms that have become "common" recently such as microaggression, systemic racism, intersectionality, lived experience, all come from CRT. And many others created other works "inspired by CRT". 30 Do they belong in K-12 classrooms? Some CRT-inspired authors are proposing perspectives, views, theories of one person, not peer reviewed at all by other scholars, and many others object to those perspectives, views and theories. Do they belong in K-12 classrooms? NOTE: You might have noticed that I use the term "CRT advocates": rather than "Critical Race Theorists" since most of the authors of popular CRT-inspired books are not "Critical Race Theorists". In fact, some CRT scholars look down on those off-shoots of CRT since they don't think they have learned CRT fully, And they are unhappy that a lot of bad press is due to those views by the off-shoot CRT advocates. (Well... I watch videos of CRT scholars discussing CRT... since I want to be sure that I understand CRT from the people who advocate it.) Liang <END, Liang Chao’s reply to a reporter regarding posts to a schools’ email list in November 2021 referencing Chinese exclusion laws and Critical Race Theory> ◦ ○ ◎ ○ ◦ vax.sccgov.org ◦ ○ ◎ ○ ◦ For assistance in Español, Tiếng Việt, 中文 or Tagalog, please call the Advice Line at 1-866-870- 7725. ◦ ○ ◎ ○ ◦ County of Santa Clara COVID-19 Updates and Quick Links ◦ ○ ◎ ○ ◦ 31 Cyrah Caburian From:carolhesc@gmail.com Sent:Tuesday, November 16, 2021 1:16 PM To:City Clerk Subject:Support Liangfang Follow Up Flag:Follow up Flag Status:Completed 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.      To whom it concerns:    Regarding the recent news, Liangfang has already clarified her position on the issue. She does not need own anyone an  apology.    Mayor Zhao has made great contribution on our city and we all benefit on her efforts. I really appreciate Mayor Zhao's  hard work on our community. We all support her.    Best Regards,  Nannan  32 Cyrah Caburian From:frances hu <frances_hu@hotmail.com> Sent:Tuesday, November 16, 2021 2:31 PM To:City Clerk Cc:Darcy Paul; Kitty Moore; Hung Wei; Jon Robert Willey; Liang-Fang Chao Subject:Honarable Mayor Paul, Vice Mayor Chao and Council Members Moore, Wei and Willey: Follow Up Flag:Follow up Flag Status:Completed 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.  Pls include my letter as written communications for the 11/16/2021 Council Meeting, public comment agenda  item, and pls help me to read it in the public comment section.     MY name is Frances Hu, and I am a Cupertino resident & a CUSD parent .  I am writing to support Liang Fang  for all she has done and is continuously doing for our community,  She is highly respected community leader  who has contributed a lot to the epic win of California voters against the racist Prop 16 in 2020.  Some people  at Cupertino‐parents google group with ulterior motives took Liang Fang's comments our of the context of her  CEA comments to attack her, which is not acceptable!!!       If you read the whole email thread sent in the google group, you can draw your own conclusion that Liang  Fang has not said anything that is out of place.   She does think CEA was a racist bill, but she firmly believed  the racist was not the only factor for the bill.   I totally agree with Liang Fang's opinion. She does not need to  apologize to anybody !!!    Our community need more leaders like Liang Fang！！！ Liang Fang, thank you for everything you have done  for our community.  We are not blind!!        Best regards,  Frances HU  33 Cyrah Caburian From:Ava Li <cupertinosaynotowoke@gmail.com> Sent:Tuesday, November 16, 2021 2:49 PM To:City Clerk; Darcy Paul; Liang Chao; Kitty Moore; Hung Wei; Jon Robert Willey Subject:Me and My Family Support Liang Fang Zhao Follow Up Flag:Follow up Flag Status:Completed 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 Cupertino City Councilor,   This is from Li's family here in Silicon Valley. We have heard the recent attacks and smears on our beloved Vice Mayor  Liang Fang, and we are writing in to send our strongest support to Liang.   Liang's interview was taken out of context and twisted. The far‐left politicians and activists like Alex Lee and Gilbert  Wong took this opportunity to advance their woke agenda. They are not on the lookout for Chinese‐Americans as they  claimed! They do not represent us!   Me and my family appreciate all the hard work Liang has done for the city, for the community, and her commitment to  supporting equal rights for everyone. We will do all we can to support her and will not let her be cancelled!   Please add my email to the public record. Thank you.      Li's family.   34 Cyrah Caburian From:Ping Ding <dingyiyi@hotmail.com> Sent:Tuesday, November 16, 2021 2:56 PM To:City Clerk; City Council Subject:Re: Support our city council and Make our city a better place to live! Follow Up Flag:Follow up Flag Status:Completed 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,     Some complains that Vice Mayor Liang Chao made wrong statement on Critical Race Theory and the Chinese  Exclusion. I believe there is misunderstanding and wrong interpretation on Vice Mayor Liang Chao.  She has  already clarified her position on the issue. She doesn't need to make any apology on the issue. On the other  hand, those people who misrepresent her have to say sorry to public.      Vice Mayor Chao has made great contribution on our city and we all benefit on her effort. I really appreciate  Vice Mayor Chao's hard work on our community.    I don't want to see any one enlarge the none sense issue on Vice Mayor Chao and damage our city council's  hard work to the city.    We all support Vice Mayor Chao.    Thanks,  Ping    Please put my email in public record!       35 Cyrah Caburian From:Kathy Jordan <kjordan114wh@gmail.com> Sent:Tuesday, November 16, 2021 2:56 PM To:City Clerk; Darcy Paul; Liang Chao; Kitty Moore; Hung Wei; Jon Robert Willey Subject:regarding Liang Chao correctly citing that Labor unions pressed for passage of the Chinese Exclusion Act Follow Up Flag:Follow up Flag Status:Completed 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.    To the Cupertino City Council:  I write in support of Liang Chao for correctly citing that labor unions pressed the US Congress to pass the Chinese  Exclusion Act.     Regarding the Chinese Exclusion Act, Ms. Chao is correct that its passage was not all about racism.  It was also about  members of US labor unions wanting to remove and reduce wage competition from Chinese emigrants.  Labor unions  and their members wanted to prop up their wages.   Please read the excerpt below from the Washington State Historical  Society for background information.     Ms. Chao has only spoken the truth.     Thank you.     Best,    Kathy Jordan      In May 1882, Congress, responding to pressure from unions, passed the Chinese Exclusion Act. This treaty with the Chinese Government banned Chinese emigrants from entering America and called for the deportation of any who arrived after 1880.    American businessmen actively sought Chinese laborers in mines and other industries, using them to provide much of the labor for building the transcontinental railroads. At first praised as diligent workers, praise turned to hostility as the railroad was completed and competition for other jobs increased.   https://www.washingtonhistory.org/education/curriculum/the‐chinese‐exclusion‐act‐of‐1882/  36 Cyrah Caburian From:Xin Wang <xinwwang@gmail.com> Sent:Tuesday, November 16, 2021 2:58 PM To:City Council; cityclear@cupertino.org Subject:Supporting Liang Fang Chao Follow Up Flag:Follow up Flag Status:Completed 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'm writing this email to support Liang Fang Chao in the light of recent events. I believe that some people with their own  agenda have twisted Liang Fang's comments and attacked her in the media and publicly.     From my own experience, over the years, Liang Fang has helped the community tremendously, She has always put the  interests of residents in the Cupertino area above anything else. I am thankful to have her on the city council and she  will always have my support in all circumstances.    Please put my email in the public record.    Thank you and regards,  Xin Wang  zip:95129     37 Cyrah Caburian From:XiangChen Xu <xc_xu@yahoo.com> Sent:Tuesday, November 16, 2021 2:59 PM To:City Council; City Clerk Subject:My comments on recent news regarding vice Mayor Chao Follow Up Flag:Follow up Flag Status:Completed 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 Councilmembers and City clerk, I am a Cupertino residents for more than 10 years. I am writing this email because I saw some biased news on Vice Mayor Chao recently. Just to clarify, after reviewing all the discussion in our local parents group, I didn't see anyone tried to support the Chinese Exclusion Act. As Chinese Americans, nobody could lose their mind to say good words on the Act. In vice Mayor Chao's long long messages, she only said the cause of the Chinese Exclusion Act was not only racism. You may agree with her or not. But she didn't do anything wrong. In this world, not all the bad things happened under the name of "racism". Vice Mayor Chao said the Act was not only caused by racism doesn't mean it was a good thing. I just hope our city council can focus on their business and ignore the noise. I don't think our vice Mayor Chao should apologize to anyone. Hope our city clerk can put my comments in public record. Thanks a lot! Sincerely yours, Xiangchen Xu   38 Cyrah Caburian From:Tony Zheng <tonyzheng@sbcglobal.net> Sent:Tuesday, November 16, 2021 3:00 PM To:City Clerk; City Council Subject:Appreciation to Council member Liang Chao (Please put my email in public record) Follow Up Flag:Follow up Flag Status:Completed 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, As a West San Jose resident and a member of google CUSD Parents group, I want to say we are fortunate to have Liang in our community. I not only appreciate her work as a Council member to benefit our common neighborhood, but also her serious attitude toward our national history. Regarding the recent discussion about Chinese Exclusion Act (CEA), it is worthwhile to examine all the details and learn full lesson how it started at grass root level and eventually became a shameful federal law. Many factors played roles, in addition to racism. My appeal to City Council is please do whatever measure to protect the health of community internet forum. One of the former City Mayors has cut people's speech in the forum, presented it in a distorted way, and invoked foreign media to start personal attack and bully. He certainly owes local public an explanation what role he has played in the chain of these worrisome events. Please put my email in public record. Thanks Sincerely, Tony Weifeng Zheng West San Jose Resident 39 Cyrah Caburian From:Leon Zhu <yzhu.leon@gmail.com> Sent:Tuesday, November 16, 2021 3:02 PM To:City Clerk; City Council Subject:I support Liang Chao. No need to apologize. Follow Up Flag:Follow up Flag Status:Completed 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,    I support Liang Chao. Liang Chao didn't do any wrong.  No need to apologize.   Please stop the vicious attack on Liang  Chao.    Please put my email in the public record.      Yu Zhu  40 Cyrah Caburian From:yinhong chen <yinhongpa2005@yahoo.com> Sent:Tuesday, November 16, 2021 3:07 PM To:City Council Subject:Liang Chao Follow Up Flag:Follow up Flag Status:Completed 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,  Good afternoon! I am a resident of Cupertino. Liang Chao has already made a clear statement regarding the issue. She  doesn’t need to apologize to anyone.She has been working very hard for our school district and our community. We all  appreciate it and support her. Thank you!    Yinhong    BTW: Please put my email on the public record. Thank you!              41 Cyrah Caburian From:B Leong <bleong@gmail.com> Sent:Tuesday, November 16, 2021 3:14 PM To:City Clerk; Darcy Paul; Liang Chao; Kitty Moore; Hung Wei; Jon Robert Willey Subject:To express support for liang chao Follow Up Flag:Follow up Flag Status:Completed 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.    To the Cupertino City Council:     I write in support of Liang Chao for correctly citing that labor unions pressed the US Congress to pass the Chinese  Exclusion Act.       Regarding the Chinese Exclusion Act, Ms. Chao is correct that its passage was not all about racism.  It was also about  members of US labor unions wanting to remove and reduce wage competition from Chinese emigrants.  Labor unions  and their members wanted to prop up their wages.        Ms. Chao has only spoken the truth.       Thank you.       Best,    Bruce Leong    42 Cyrah Caburian From:Alexander Mabanta <alexander.mabanta@gmail.com> Sent:Tuesday, November 16, 2021 3:14 PM To:City Council; Cupertino City Manager's Office; City Clerk Subject:Public Comment for November 16, 2021 Meeting Follow Up Flag:Follow up Flag Status:Completed 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.    Honorable Council Members of the City of Cupertino,    My name is Alex Mabanta and I am a 20 year resident of Saratoga. Before they were incorporated in 1955 and 1956,  Saratoga and Cupertino were known as Westside San  José. In San José, Chinese immigrants were the primary workforce  in developing Santa Clara County as the “fruit bowl of America '' and San José was home to five Chinatowns. Chinese  immigrants were critical to the Santa Clara County economy, especially in agriculture, manufacturing and heavy  construction, notably as workers on the San José Railroad and Santa Cruz‐Monterey Line in the 1870s. Despite the  contributions of Chinese workers and laborers, leaders of the city of  San José were among many who spearheaded the  state and federal Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882, and the city held the first State Convention of the Anti‐Chinese League  in 1886.     Until the 1950's, Chinese Americans were legally barred from owning property, and they could not accumulate wealth.  In San  José, the Chinatowns built by the collective efforts of low‐wage Chinese workers were all burned down, with  support from San  José City Councilmembers. San  José Mayor Breyfogle, on the burning of the last Chinatown, called  Chinatowns “a public nuisance, injurious to private property adjacent thereto, dangerous to the health and welfare of all  citizens."     Cupertino City Council Members have recently discussed issues of education, race, labor, and Chinese American history.  I encourage councilmembers to create a city commission that studies Cupertino's history and role, as a part of Westside  San  José and as an incorporated city, with respect to discriminatory policies against  Asian Americans in general and  Chinese Americans in particular. The commission may be empowered to produce timely reports and recommend city  action, such as creating historic sites or plaques.     On September 8th, 2021, the City of  San José unanimously acknowledged and apologized for the role the city played,  including statements and actions by elected city leaders, against Chinese Americans. The resolution sought to educate  the public of city history.  I urge Cupertino to do the same.     Sincerely,  Alex Mabanta  Resident of Saratoga, California  43 Cyrah Caburian From:Shaohua Yang <shaohua.yang@gmail.com> Sent:Tuesday, November 16, 2021 3:15 PM To:City Clerk; City Council Subject:public comment submission for today's council meeting Follow Up Flag:Follow up Flag Status:Completed 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 Clerk and Council Members,     My name is Shaohua Yang. I am writing this email for today's city council meeting, and request to have this email be  included in the public record.     Recently, a prior mayor of Cupertino City, Mr Gilbert Wong, launched a disinformation campaign based on false  information against another Cupertino City public servant, Ms Liang Chao.     Mr Gilbert Wong made a false accusation that Ms Liang Chao defended the Chinese Exclusion Act. As a member of the  Google group where Mr Gilbert Wong claimed that he obtained such information from, I am asserting that Mr Gilbert  Wong fabricated such information. Ms Liang Chao and some of us discussed how the Chinese Exclusion Act was  campaigned for by the progressive workingman's party in California in the 1870s before it eventually signed into law in  1882. We discussed the perspectives of what actually happened and how this history was described in the Californian  Ethnic Studies Model Curriculum. Our CUSD parent Google group has around 2000 members. Mr Gilbert Wong was the  only one of very few people (seemingly two including Mr Gilbert Wong) who attempted to distort Liang's words.  Because of his heinous false accusation, the CUSD parent Google group administrators unanimously voted to evict  Mr Gilbert Wong.     The CUSD parent Google group is made of a significant number of Chinese, Indian, and people of other races. We cherish  the diversity and mutual respect in our community. Mr Gilbert Wong's words were not just perceived as political and  divisive, but rather racist. Our society is currently plagued by cancel culture. Mr Gilbert Wong, as a public figure, should  know better.     I am requesting that the Cupertino City Council condemn Mr Gilbert Wong for his shameless false accusation.     Best regards,  Shaohua  44 Cyrah Caburian From:Richelle Duan <richelleduan@gmail.com> Sent:Tuesday, November 16, 2021 3:25 PM To:City Council Subject:Do not attack Liangfang Zhao! Follow Up Flag:Follow up Flag Status:Completed 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.    Liangfang Zhao did so much for our community. Her leadership and contribution in the community was seen by all of us.  Someone picked up a few words from her discussion and twist it, to attack her! This strategy was used in the Culture  Revolution in the 1960s in China and killed a lot of innocent people. Don't make that mistake here! We support  Liangfang!  45 Cyrah Caburian From:Maryam Syed <maryam.syed2096@gmail.com> Sent:Tuesday, November 16, 2021 3:28 PM To:City Clerk; Darcy Paul; Hung Wei; iangChao@cupertino.org; Jon Robert Willey; Kitty Moore Subject:In Support of Liang Fang Chao Follow Up Flag:Follow up Flag Status:Completed 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.    Hello,     I wanted to say that from my understanding, there is a lot of anger about something Liang Fang Chao said , which was  taken completely out of context and was not even a complete quote ‐ and that her explanations have been completely  disregarded. I hear that people want her “reprimanded”, and I hope that this board does NOT bow down to the pressure  of angry people who do not know the full story. From my interactions with Liang Fang Chao, she has always been clear  spoken, polite and calm, and has never justified “racism” in any way.  It should be obvious to everybody that racism is  only one lens with which to examine the world and negative events, and that for a fuller understanding we must  examine all aspects of a given situation when teaching history.Stating this is all Liang Fang Chao did.      If you only look at every problem as an issue of racism, then you will not have an accurate view of the situation and will  miss potential solutions. If anybody disagrees, that only merits a conversation, not a punishment for not conforming to  the views of others or contributing to an echo chamber. Insistence on such conformity never devalues the one being  shut down, it only makes those demanding silence look as if their truth is false.    I want to believe that we can have these important discussions without misrepresenting people’s arguments and  shutting people down because we don’t like what they say. It is very hard to be the only one to stand up and suggest  something that people may not want to hear. If we believe that diversity is important, then please show that we can  have a real dialogue by showing respect to Liang Fang Chao for speaking up, rather than reprimanding her for it at  today’s meeting.    Thank you,    ‐Maryam              ‐‐   Maryam Syed  46 Cyrah Caburian From:Amy Yuan <yanyuan.cn@gmail.com> Sent:Tuesday, November 16, 2021 3:36 PM To:City Clerk; Darcy Paul; Liang Chao; Kitty Moore; Hung Wei; Jon Robert Willey Subject:Public Comment, 11/16/2021 City Council Meeting, Stand with Liang Fang Chao Follow Up Flag:Follow up Flag Status:Completed 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.    Honorable Mayor Paul, Vice Mayor Chao, and Council Members Moore, Wei, and Willey:    My name is Yan Yuan, and I am a Chinese American and a mother of two children. I am writing to you regarding Liang Fang Chao's comments on the Chinese Exclusion Acts.     I have read what Liang has written and it became obvious that her comment was taken out of context. She used the Chinese Exclusion Act as an example saying we cannot always just use the lens of "racism" to examine EVERYTHING. Other than racism, there might be other factors that contributed to one historical bill or event. Because of that, her critics said "Liang said that the Chinese Exclusion Act is not racist" and they demand  apologies from her for something she never said.    Liang is a well‐respected leader in our community and she has done tremendous work fighting against racism, e.g.,  supporting equal rights for Asian students. I stand with her!    Yan Yuan                47 Cyrah Caburian From:Helen H <huahelen@gmail.com> Sent:Tuesday, November 16, 2021 3:43 PM To:City Clerk; City Council Subject:Council meeting today--In support of Vice Mayor Liang Chao Follow Up Flag:Follow up Flag Status:Completed 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 of Cupertino Councilmembers,     I am writing in support of Vice Mayor Liang Chao. I have known Ms. Liang Chao over the last year and half, watched  many of her speeches/written comments and worked with her as a volunteer. She is an active grassroot community  leader with great integrity, working tirelessly for her community and fighting against injustice and racism. The accusation  against Ms. Liang Chao was baseless, taking her words regarding the Chinese Exclusion Act out of context and should be  further investigated. Ms. Liang Chao is very valuable to the City of Cupertino, the Asian community and beyond. I trust  her and support her!    Best regards,  Helen  48 Cyrah Caburian From:Ping Gao <gaoping@gmail.com> Sent:Tuesday, November 16, 2021 3:43 PM To:City Council; City Clerk Subject:Condemn the Attack on City Council Liang Follow Up Flag:Follow up Flag Status:Completed 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,     This is Ping, a 14‐year Cupertino resident and also a CUSD parent. I was aware of the recent rumor and malicious attack  on our vice mayor Liang‐Fang Chao. I just want to write to you and let you know that I condemn Gibert Wong and  whoever behind the scenes to manipulate this malicious attack on Liang‐Fang.     First of all, I'm also a parent in the school district parent's email group. I have never seen Gilbert Wong participate in any  meaningful discussion about school district issues. Instead, he immediately jumped out and pointed fingers at Liang,  quoting her words out of context and labeled her as "racist"? I didn't see anything racism from Liang's context. The  accusation from Gilbert Wong is solely misinterpreting Liang's words on purpose. I have to say that his acting is so awful  that it is insulting to Cupertino residents and CUSD parents' intelligence.    I demand an apology from Gilbert Wong to Cupertino residents and CUSD parents: no integrity, spreading rumors, and  attacking other people by falsely labeling other as racist at his will. If we allow someone as GIlbert Wong to be as a  political leader, it will be a disaster to all of us.      Please keep my email in the public record.    Thank you,  Ping    49 Cyrah Caburian From:Ben Hu <ben.hu2005@gmail.com> Sent:Tuesday, November 16, 2021 3:44 PM To:City Clerk; City Council Subject:No "cancel" war in Cupertino and against Ms. Liang Fang Follow Up Flag:Follow up Flag Status:Completed 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.    Honorable Mayor Paul, Vice Mayor Chao, and Council Members Moore, Wei, and Willey:    Please include my letter as written communications for the 11/16/2021 Council meeting, public comment agenda item,  and please help me to read it in the public comment section.    My name is Benjamin Hu, and I am a cupertino resident, a CUSD school district parent, and a member of the CUSD‐ parents Google group, where Liang Chao's comments on  the Chinese Exclusion Acts were taken out of context and  became bombshells in the planned attempts trying to cancel Liang. I am also a member of the "Equal Rights for All PAC",  which is led by Ward Connerly, the father of Prop 209.    Vice Mayor Liang Chao has been a highly respected community leader, and she has contributed considerably to the epic  win of California voters against the racist Prop 16 in 2020 and with a 57:43, Liang and California voters successfully  defended the Prop 209 in California constitution, which says:    "The state shall not discriminate against, or grant preferential treatment to, any individual or group on the basis of race,  sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin in the operation of public employment, public education, or public contracting."  Upholding these equality values, Liang has never been seen as a racist and she has always tried to conduct objectively  without blindly falling into any partisan line in her city management decisions. She does that by putting herself into  research on every topic she is facing. She won't blindly follow the popular opinions, and she won't blindly follow the  media, and she won't blindly follow whoever can donate money to her campaign.    And we, the south bay residents, as well as over 7,000 members of our PAC, respect Liang for her spirit of independent  research and thinking.    If you read the whole email thread sent in the CUSD‐parents group, you can definitely draw your own conclusion that  Liang has not said anything that is out of place. She does think CEA was a racist bill, but she firmly believes that racism  was not the only factor for the bill.     And I agree with this observation.    For those who claim Liang Fang is a racist and she tried to defend the CEA, without even the attention to listen or  examine what was said by Liang, I condemn their attempt to cancel Liang using this hoax.    And I especially condemn Neil Park who has posted a screenshot of a private (though big) school district forum  discussion to Twitter, for cyberbullying. Neil has done this kind of despicable thing before and he was expelled from that  group for the same reason. Yet again, he started another fuzz against Liang last week!    50 Also I condemn Gilbert Wong, who repeatedly ignored the other parents' comments on him about his understanding of  the situation, and repeatedly urged Liang to "apologize" for something that Liang has never said or done.  Liang never  said that CEA was not racist but we know Gilbert was an avid supporter of the racist bill Prop 16. Gilbert, please stop  your ugly attempts to stir the emotion among our Chinese community!     Gilbert, you are no leader of us, by any means!  And you do not stand for us at all! So stop pretending to be an Asian  leader!    Vice Mayor Liang, I would like to let you know that all of our "No on Prop 16" campaign volunteers are standing behind  you. And all of our common sense voters are standing behind you. Do not give in to the "cancel culture", and please  continue your wonderful work for the benefit of the greater Bay Area!, as well as California!    Thank you very much!      Sincerely,    Benjamin Hu  51 Cyrah Caburian From:Leon Chen <leonlixinchen@gmail.com> Sent:Tuesday, November 16, 2021 3:47 PM To:City Council; City Clerk Subject:Support Vice Major Liang Chao! Follow Up Flag:Follow up Flag Status:Completed 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 members,     Recently there have been rumors that Vice Major Liang Chao said "Chinese exclusion act is not racism", which is total  nonsense. Vice Major Chao never said that, and this has been deliberately misconstrued. In fact, Vice Major Chao is  against all forms of racism.    Vice Major Chao has done a lot for Cupertino residents before and while she's serving on the city council, and we  wholeheartedly support her!    Please put my email in the public record.    Sincerely,  Leon Chen  Resident of 10168 Amelia Ct, Cupertino      52 Cyrah Caburian From:zhiyu <zybrook@protonmail.com> Sent:Tuesday, November 16, 2021 3:52 PM To:City Clerk; City Council Subject:Public Comment for the 11/16 City Council meeting Follow Up Flag:Follow up Flag Status:Completed 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.    Honorable Mayor Paul, Vice Mayor Chao, and Council Members Moore, Wei, and Willey:    Please include my letter as written communications for the 11/16/2021 Council meeting, public comment agenda item,  and please help me to read it in the public comment section. The following is my message:    My name is David He. I have been a CUSD Parent for 8 years. As a Chinese immigrant and naturalized US Citizen, I feel  we as a community are at a critical moment where a lot of forces are trying to tear apart the people and destroy this  peaceful city of Cupertino. These forces and political activists, including the white Sunnyvale Council member Alysa  Cisneros and Foothill De‐Anza Community College Trustee Gilbert Wong, are very enthusiastic at smearing campaign and  telling alternative "truth" to the public. No matter what race they are, and what self‐claimed "liberal" stance they took,  they are in essence attacking our Asian, especially Chinese community in a very racist approach. Gilbert Wong, for  example, has continuously acted as agents for special interest group, to destroy the value of the community. Fortunately  their tricks have failed to work for most of the time as our community are still standing united. Their latest gimmick is  the coordinated smearing and attacking of Liang Fang. Liang Fang has always been a supporter of a united Cupertino  where all the ethnic groups live and work together as one. She has been a role model for Chinese community especially.  All of my family and Chinese American friends support Liang Fang and fully understand her opinion about the Chinese  Exclusion Act in a context. We are very upset and annoyed to see that Gilbert Wong and Alysa Cisneros have even  coordinated the attack with Foreign Agencies that are listed by US national security as very hostile: the CCP's state  media outlet "Global Times". We saw as evidence in multiple social media groups that supporters of Gilbert and Alysa  even took pride in their effort of involving CCP State Media in this smearing campaign against Liang Fang and our great  city of Cupertino. For this alone, I request the city of Cupertino to issue an official condemnation for this smearing  campaign and to its organizers: Gilbert Wong and Alysa Cisneros.                  The Chinese community in Cupertino and South Bay support Liang Fang, we would not allow any future attack on  our elected official who have served this community well and above all the expectations.   Thank you.     ‐‐David He  Parent from CUSD     Sent with ProtonMail Secure Email.    53 Cyrah Caburian From:Jenny Zhao <yzhao1017@yahoo.com> Sent:Tuesday, November 16, 2021 3:52 PM To:City Clerk; City Council Cc:Jenny Zhao Subject:Councilmember Chao has my full support Follow Up Flag:Follow up Flag Status:Completed 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 mayor and city council, As a member of the community and a Chinese immigrant, I am writing to express my full support to Councilmember Chao for her dedicated service to the community. Councilmember Chao is the victim of cyber violence. Her words in the CUSD parent group discussion was cherry-picked and twisted to form an attack piece against her. It's very upset to witness such disgusting behavior in a quiet town like Cupertino. Councilmember Chao truly cares about the community, her involvements in safety, crime, education and many other things over the years, are well known and recognized especially by our Asian community. She has our full trust and support. I urge the City of Cupertino to condemn and stop the misinformation. Those so called representatives such as Alex Lee, they cannot represent this community and our value at all. Thanks, Jenny Zhao 1 Cyrah Caburian From:Tony Guan <guanxiaohua@gmail.com> Sent:Tuesday, November 16, 2021 2:03 PM To:City Clerk; Darcy Paul; Liang Chao; Kitty Moore; Hung Wei; Jon Robert Willey Subject:Public Comment, 11/16/2021 City Council Meeting, in defense of Freedom of Speech Follow Up Flag:Follow up Flag Status:Completed 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.    Honorable Mayor Paul, Vice Mayor Chao, and Council Members Moore, Wei, and Willey:   Please include my letter as written communications for the 11/16/2021 Council meeting, public comment agenda item, and please help me to read it in the public comment section. My name is Tony Guan, and I am a CUSD school district parent, and a member of the CUSD-parents Google group, where Liang Chao's comments on the Chinese Exclusion Acts were taken out of context and became bombshells in the planned attempts trying to cancel Liang. I am also the Vice president of the "Equal Rights for All PAC", which is led by Ward Connerly, the father of Prop 209. Vice Mayor Liang Chao has been a highly respected community leader, and she has contributed considerably to the epic win of California voters against the racist Prop 16 in 2020 and with a 57:43, Liang and California voters successfully defended the Prop 209 in California constitution, which says:    "The state shall not discriminate against, or grant preferential treatment to, any  individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin in the  operation of public employment, public education, or public contracting."  Upholding these equality values, Liang has never been seen as a racist and she has always tried to conduct objectively without blindly falling into any partisan line in her city management decisions. She does that by putting herself into research on every topic she is facing. She won't blindly follow the popular opinions, and she won't blindly follow the media, and she won't blindly follow whoever can donate money to her campaign. And we, the south bay residents, as well as over 7,000 members of our PAC, respect Liang for her spirit of independent research and thinking. If you read the whole email thread sent in the CUSD-parents group, you can definitely draw your own conclusion that Liang has not said anything that is out of place. She does think CEA was a racist bill, but she firmly believes that racism was not the only factor for the bill. 2 And I agree with this observation. For those who claim Liang Fang is a racist and she tried to defend the CEA, without even the attention to listen or examine what was said by Liang, I condemn their attempt to cancel Liang using this hoax. And I especially condemn Neil Park who has posted a screenshot of a private (though big) school district forum discussion to Twitter, for cyberbullying. Neil has done this kind of despicable thing before and he was expelled from that group for the same reason. Yet again, he started another fuzz against Liang last week! Also I condemn Gilbert Wong, who repeatedly ignored the other parents' comments on him about his understanding of the situation, and repeatedly urged Liang to "apologize" for something that Liang has never said or done. Liang never said that CEA was not racist but we know Gilbert was an avid supporter of the racist bill Prop 16. Gilbert, please stop your ugly attempts to stir the emotion among our Chinese community! Gilbert, you are no leader of us, by any means! And you do not stand for us at all! So stop pretending to be an Asian leader! Vice Mayor Liang, I would like to let you know that all of our "No on Prop 16" campaign volunteers are standing behind you. And all of our common sense voters are standing behind you. Do not give in to the "cancel culture", and please continue your wonderful work for the benefit of the greater Bay Area!, as well as California! Thank you very much! Sincerely, Tony Guan VP Equal Rights for All Political Action Committee