CC 04-02-2025 Item No. 9. CIty Council Special Projects Policy_Written Communications1
Lauren Sapudar
From:S B <sashibegur@gmail.com>
Sent:Monday, March 31, 2025 8:55 AM
To:City Clerk; City Council; City Attorney's Office; Cupertino City Manager's Office
Subject:Agenda Item 9 - Comments & Questions
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 City Council,
Please include the following email in the written communications for Wed 2nd City Council meeting
To the Mayor and Council,
The Special Projects policy aims to improve transparency and tracking of one-time projects requiring City
Council approval for funding outside of base departmental budgets. As a resident of Cupertino, I am
raising concerns about the policy, not to suggest it should not be implemented, but to emphasize that it
alone may not fully guarantee transparency. The policy raises important questions and should be
accompanied by additional measures to ensure accountability and transparency to residents.
Implementing it in isolation could lead to new issues, and I recommend adopting further policies to
address these concerns.
1. The city manager's discretionary budget cannot exceed $50K.
2. All special projects valued above $50K must be brought before the city council for approval.
3. No consultants can be hired to determine the cost of a special project.
4. Every month, all potential special projects must be reported to the council to prevent staff from
investing significant time into a project that may be cancelled when it comes up for approval.
5. Special projects should address solving problems for residents, not be based on a "nice-to-have"
philosophy.
6. Special projects cannot be placed on the consent agenda.
7. Detailed status updates on special projects must be provided regularly. However, the
responsibility for executing the project remains with the city manager and staff, ensuring that poor
decision-making or failure of execution cannot be deflected.
8. There should be a limit to the number of special projects executed by staff, with a primary focus
on the City Work Plan (CWP), not on special projects.
9. Once a special project is approved, any changes to its schedule, budget overruns, or "feature
creep" must trigger a reanalysis of the project to ensure it continues to address a real need for the
residents, rather than evolving into a "nice-to-have" or “should-also-do" type of initiative.
By adopting these additional policies, we can ensure that special projects are executed in a transparent,
efficient, and accountable manner that directly benefits the residents.
2
regards
Sashi Begur