Loading...
CC 03-15-2022_Late_Written CommunicationsCC 315 # Farmers Market Written Comments From:Kirsten Squarcia To:City Clerk Subject:FW: City Council Meeting Information Date:Tuesday, March 15, 2022 6:13:15 PM Attachments:farmers_market.pdf image001.png image009.png image011.png image012.png image013.png image014.png image015.png image016.png Written communications for special meeting item #1 Farmers Market. Kirsten Squarcia​ City Clerk City Manager's Office KirstenS@cupertino.org (408) 777-3225 From: Andy DeBaets <debaets@hotmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, March 15, 2022 4:50 PM To: Kirsten Squarcia <KirstenS@cupertino.org>; Steve Schmidt <steve@wcfma.org>; Becky Smith <beckys100@hotmail.com> Cc: Jon Robert Willey <JWilley@cupertino.org>; jerry lami <jerrylami16@gmail.com> Subject: Re: City Council Meeting Information CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hi Kirsten, I thought I had attached this. Sorry! Hope it's not too late Thanks, Andy Farmer’s Market Donations •A small Cupertino based volunteer team runs the interface between the WC Farmers Market and WestValley Community Services •35 year residents •Working ourselves,and coordinating the work of many other volunteers •About 10 volunteers each Sunday 1:00-3:00 PM gathering 1-3000 lbs produce •What we do: •In our eighth year working with Steve and WC Farmers Market Weekly produce donations Monthly in-kind donation receiptsFarmer’s Market 0 100000 200000 300000 400000 500000 600000 700000 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Cumulative Farmers’ Markets Donations for WVCS Pantry Over 650,000 lbs of produce provided for WVCS clients More Background: Volunteers & Trucks •We arrange the volunteers each week & weigh / record donations •Much help from other community volunteers! •I pack produce and drive the small WVCS box truck •I park in the senior center parking lot,ideally close to the farmers •The farmers have 3 very large trucks, 3 large box trucks, and a larger number of small box trucks like mine,or large pickup trucks /vans. •Multiple food trucks are present as well Direct Impacts of Proposed Location Change •Street parking,so I need to be able to park the box truck close to the farmers, not 3-4 blocks away. •Hauling produce to and from the box truck will block pedestrian traffic on the sidewalk (shoppers and residents) •Ability to setup and tear down large truck arrangements •Associated impacts on the overall Farmer’s Market Potential Impacts of Proposed Location Change Memorial Park Turnaround loop Due to parking lot shape / aspect ratio,the largest truck can be located anywhere There is a turnaround loop, which is not present at Monta Vista Park The red rectangle represents one of the largest three trucks. Scale is approximate Monta Vista Park For the largest 3 trucks: •No turnaround area •Width of entrance is 5’narrower than Memorial parking lot •Unclear if entry /exit is possible •2/3 area likely not practically accessible Other trucks •Unclear how well the 3 large box trucks (the next largest size down) can navigate the space Largest trucks = “Anchor” farmers Monta Vista Park: Detail For the large trucks: •Street parking near entrance will prevent large truck entrance/exit (red: large truck, green: car on street) Zoom in Backup “Anchor” Farmers •The large trucks represent some of the “anchor” booths: •Carlos (White refrigerated truck) -Best general produce •Sunrise -Large fruit booth •Sweet Tree -Large fruit booth •If the location change causes loss of the “anchor” farmers, there is risk to the viability of the whole market From:Joseph Fruen To:City Clerk; City Council; Cupertino City Manager"s Office; Kerri Heusler; Housing; Darcy Paul; Kitty Moore; Liang Chao; Hung Wei; Jon Robert Willey Cc:Kirsten Squarcia Subject:Re: Item 10: Progress on Work Program item to develop ELI housing on public land along Mary Avenue Date:Tuesday, March 15, 2022 5:07:11 PM 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 Councilmembers: I am delighted to see this item receive time on the council agenda. Cupertino, like most jurisdictions, has struggled to find means for developing extremely low income housing. Advocates have pointed to the Mary Avenue site for many years as a potential location for housing affordable to this population. I urge you to examine what policies you may need to modify or set aside to enable such housing, and to proceed with RFP/RFQ for an ELI housing project at this site. Many thanks, J.R. Fruen Cupertino resident CC 315 #0 ELI and BMR Housing Units Written Comments From:Joseph Fruen To:City Clerk; City Council; Cupertino City Manager"s Office; Kerri Heusler; Housing; Darcy Paul; Kitty Moore; Liang Chao; Hung Wei; Jon Robert Willey Cc:Kirsten Squarcia Subject:Re: Item 10: Progress on Work Program item to develop ELI housing on public land along Mary Avenue Date:Tuesday, March 15, 2022 5:07:11 PM 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 Councilmembers: I am delighted to see this item receive time on the council agenda. Cupertino, like most jurisdictions, has struggled to find means for developing extremely low income housing. Advocates have pointed to the Mary Avenue site for many years as a potential location for housing affordable to this population. I urge you to examine what policies you may need to modify or set aside to enable such housing, and to proceed with RFP/RFQ for an ELI housing project at this site. Many thanks, J.R. Fruen Cupertino resident From:frances hu To:City Clerk Subject:Re: my written comments for item #12 Date:Tuesday, March 15, 2022 10:39:46 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. I fully support city council to send official letter to request CUSD to reconsider the school closure decision. The CUSD financials today is totally different from the Oct. 14th when CUSD voted to close REgnart and other CUSD school. As CUSD move to basic aid school district starting next school year, the decline of enrollment would not have any impact of the total funding from state. So the cited reasons for CUSD board to close Regnart and other CUSD school, ongoing budget shprtfalls and decline enrollment, are no longer valid today. While closing Regnart, CUSD has allocated a lot of funding and resources to school outside of Cupertino, such as CLIP in WSJ and BH in Saratoga, this is terrible abuse of Cupertino taxpayer' money. in addition, CUSD's redirection of REgnart enrollment and resources to schools out of Cupertino is total discrimination of Cupertino city school, and violation of educational equity rights of our children and our family. Pls take immediate action to stop CUSD to close our beloved NHS Regnart!!! From:Joseph Fruen To:Cupertino City Manager"s Office; Kirsten Squarcia; City Clerk; Darcy Paul; Kitty Moore; Liang Chao; Jon Robert Willey; Hung Wei Subject:RE: Item 12 - Proposed Letter to CUSD Board re the Closure of Regnart and Meyerholz Elementary Schools Date:Tuesday, March 15, 2022 9:52:08 PM 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 Councilmembers: I write to you this evening to highlight a number of inaccuracies in the letter the Vice-Mayor has proposed for your consideration. In particular, as someone who sat on the Superintendent's Citizens Advisory Committee in 2020 ("2020 CAC"), I was very surprised to read the series of assertions that the Vice-Mayor makes at page 2 of the proposed letter. These claims appear to ignore all of the work that the 2020 CAC performed. I address each assertion in turn based both on publicly available materials and my personal knowledge from having served on the 2020 CAC: The Vice-Mayor writes that the District "did not did not fully consider alternatives outlined in the Best Practice Guide to ensure that school closure is the last resort." On the contrary, by the time our CAC had formed, our purpose was to pick up where a 2017 CAC left off after its recommended strategies failed to resolve the District's enrollment-related budget concerns, and in respose to the Board's intervening "Listening Sessions." The 2020 CAC's initial meetings consisted of a deep examination of enrollment trends, the District's budget, and prior efforts at addressing enrollment and budget trends. The 2020 CAC also examined the feedback from the Board's Listening Sessions. The materials the 2020 CAC received were available for public inspection. Only after reviewing all of this information did the 2020 CAC proceed to look at school consolidation or closure as means for closing the District's projected budget gap. This was an especially emotional and difficult point for the 2020 CAC members. The Vice-Mayor writes that the District "did not assess and compare the various costs associated with consolidating schools with the savings in the operating cost of one school ($400,000)." This claim is inaccurate. The 2020 CAC looked specifically at the cost of running schools in its examination of the budget. It did so both as a whole and in smaller working grouops. Indeed, it had to examine such costs in order to be able to present coherent closure and consolidation plans at the conclusion of its mandate. The 2020 CAC looked at a variety of different closure scenarios involving a variable number of school sites prior to presenting them to the Board and the public on October 22, 2020 for examination and comment. The Vice-Mayor writes that the District "did not fairly assess enrollment trends of all schools under consideration." The 2020 CAC looked at the enrollment trends at all sites. Equity, including geographical equity, was an agreed-upon guiding criterion for evaluating each site. To the extent that the Vice-Mayor intends this statement to mean that the 2020 CAC itself was not fair, then I direct Council to review the District's letter, submitted today via email from Nancy Mak, on how the 2020 CAC was formed. Members were chosen by a third-party neutral facilitator with successive vetting by a retired judge in order to ensure that members could take a fair-minded approach and that they would represent a wide assortment of interests in the District--interests that the Education Code suggests for a District Advisory Committee for school closures and the disposition of surplus property. The approach was modeled on a similar CAC constituted by the Fremont Union High School District to address enrollment concerns affecting Lynbrook High School. The Lynbrook enrollment CAC is largely regarded as a success. It is hard to see how a fairer process could have been created for constituting the 2020 CAC. The Vice-Mayor writes that the District "did not gather facts to disclose assignment strategies causing enrollment declines in some schools and increases in other neighboring schools." The Vice-Mayor is mistaken. The 2020 CAC examined the history of enrollment trends at all schools, as well as the District's policies that influenced enrollment both district-wide and on a site-specific basis. The Vice-Mayor writes that the District "did not take into account the temporary effect of the pandemic." The 2020 CAC received data that relied primarily on pre-COVID-19 trends. CAC members raised the issue of the pandemic's impact and were informed that the data in projections assumed that the pandemic's impact would be temporary. The Vice-Mayor writes that the District "did not consider the adverse educational impacts of larger elementary schools." The 2020 CAC was given direction on ideal school sizes developed by the Board and District staff in relation to both large schools and small schools. The Board engaged in that process in 2018-2019 and established a target of a minimum of three kindergarten classes per school. The 2020 CAC worked to stay within those parameters. As such, the District did consider the adverse education impact presented by school sizes. The Vice-Mayor writes that the District "did not consider the regional trends to smaller schools with smaller classes." The 2020 CAC examined regional enrollment trends, especially regional declines in enrollment as part of its process. This issue arose multiple times, including in discussions of opening enrollment to people living outside the District. The Vice-Mayor writes that the District "did not take into account the effect on enrollment of significant housing-production mandates being adopted by every city government." Multiple members of the 2020 CAC raised the issue of 6th Cycle RHNA requirements and the fact that each city in the District's jurisdiction would have to undertake an update of its Housing Element. As such, the District did examine the potential for new enrollment associated with new housing. In addition to these points that are internal to the 2020 CAC process, contrary to the Vice- Mayor's claim, did consider traffic impacts as part of its process, as noted in the materials for the Board's September 9, 2021 materials. I would also add that the Board considered the budget over 30 times from August 2019 leading up to the October 2021 decision to close and consolidate schools, as noted in the District's CUSD Timeline of Historical Resources: Board Meeting Agendas (Items) and Recordings. The Board separately considered enrollment an additional 22 times during that period. It is therefore very hard to conclude, as the Vice-Mayor does, that the District "did not fully consider the improved conditions of the School District finances to evaluate the necessity of school closure." If the city, speaking through the council had wanted to voice most of the concerns in the Vice-Mayor's letter, any one of those meetings would have provided a suitable forum rather than transmitting this letter now, after a decision has already been made and many people have made important personal and financial decisions relying on that decision. I understand the desire to give voice to the deep feelings of residents and community members who are losing their neighborhood schools. All of us who served on the 2020 CAC experienced those feelings. I think it's a tragedy that even a single school would have to close. However, before you consider sending any letter to the CUSD Board, I would ask that you carefully vet each of the claims it presents as those in the Vice-Mayor's proposed letter find no support in the record. Aiding the community and the District in this difficult moment requires reliance on accurate information. The Vice-Mayor's letter--in its current form--does not pass that test. Many thanks for your consideration, J.R. Fruen Cupertino resident From:Jingjun Shu To:City Clerk; City Council Subject:Re: 3/15 City Council Meeting: Agenda Item #12 (CUSD) Date:Tuesday, March 15, 2022 9:40:18 PM 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. Please put my email in public record. Thank you! Joan On Tue, Mar 15, 2022 at 6:53 PM Jingjun Shu <jingjun.shu@gmail.com> wrote: Dear Honorable City Council, My son is a 5th grader at Meyerholz. According to the school's bell schedule (attached below), there is a total of EIGHT(8) lunch bells. To accommodate the large student body, the students are divided into 4 lunch groups, stacked with distinct start and end bells. To work around the inappropriately large number of lunch bells, Meyerholz limits breaks, so the students stay inside for 2 hours straight, 3 times a day. The campus also has an alarmingly large number of portable classrooms. Our school, and most of the schools within CUSD are already too crowded, and the infrastructure of most campuses can't hold more than 500 students. Closing schools make this matter worse. Please treat our young students with respect and dignity. Thank you. Joan From:Deyun Han To:City Clerk Subject:Public comments topic #12 March 15 City Coucil Date:Tuesday, March 15, 2022 9:12:44 PM 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, Below is my public comment for agenda item #12. We request CUSD to reconsider the closure of Regart. There are many concerns from the closure of school that have not been properly addressed. For example, one concern is that the closure of Regnart will make the Lincoln area terrible traffic even worse. Please make my comments public. Thanks, Deyun From:Howard Huang, Resident To:City Clerk Subject:Fwd: Public comment, Agenda Item 12., “Consider issuing a request to the CUSD Board for reconsideration of the future closures of Regnart and Meyerholz Elementary Schools” Date:Tuesday, March 15, 2022 8:58:24 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. I sent this last night but it doesn't appear to have been added to the written communications. Please add it to the public record. Thanks, Howard Huang CUSD Parent ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Howard Huang, Resident <resident.howardh@gmail.com> Date: Mon, Mar 14, 2022 at 11:53 PM Subject: Public comment, Agenda Item 12., “Consider issuing a request to the CUSD Board for reconsideration of the future closures of Regnart and Meyerholz Elementary Schools” To: <citycouncil@cupertino.org> Cc: board@cusdk8.org <board@cusdk8.org>, Stacy Yao <yao_stacy@cusdk8.org>, <manager@cupertino.org> Please add my comment to the public record for Agenda Item 12 Dear Mayor Paul and Cupertino City Council, As a CUSD parent, Regarding Item 12., “Consider issuing a request to the CUSD Board for reconsideration of the future closures of Regnart and Meyerholz Elementary Schools,” I urge you todecline to issue the request and instead meet with the district staff and Superintendent Yao to become educated on the facts of why the decision was made. I am concerned that the City of Cupertino is taking an adversarial position in this matter by sending this letter that does not rely on unbiased information from the district and having the Staff Report issued from the “City Attorney’s Office.” I also encourage you to read the district’s FAQ page that addresses much of the speculation that has been stated on social media and Google groups, here (there is also a link on the district’s homepage). For example, it has been repeatedly claimed that over 100 students are on a waitlist for Regnart, usually leaving out what grades. However, when looking at the district’s FAQ, one sees that this year (2021-2022) some grades only had 7 or 8 waitlisted students, which is obviously not sufficient to open another class when normal classes are 24 or 33 students. Another important point is in regards to the cost of running a school, which is $1.34M per the FAQ, a substantial amount. You have previously received my communication regarding average CUSD elementary school sizes and the errors stated at that time. Again, elementary school enrollment this year is 8943 students (https://www.cusdk8.org/Page/8733), and assuming enrollment doesn’t decline next year the average school size will be < 500 students per school (8943 / 18 schools). It is important to note that class sizes are not changing. Regarding community involvement and a 7-11 committee, it is important to note that the district did have multiple Citizens Advisory Committees over the years, each with more than 7 to 11 committee members (the members of the 2020 CAC are listed here https://www.cusdk8.org/Page/8878, and the group is described here https://www.cusdk8.org/domain/3718). In my mind, they involved more members of the public than a 7-11 committee would have required. As far as the budget is concerned, I don’t think the district and board should be faulted for increasing reserves and pulling levers to improve future finances. Please also remember that it is important to invest limited resources in people, not buildings. Thank you for considering my thoughts regarding this important matter. Regards, Howard Huang CUSD Parent From:Lijian Liu To:City Clerk Subject:Public comment on topic #12 on March 15 City Council Date:Tuesday, March 15, 2022 8:50:15 PM 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, We don't agree with CUSD to close Regnart. We bought our house in Cupertino because of the excellent school district. The closure of the excellent schools will create such a huge damage to the community and make parents lose their confidence in the school district. Eventually the closure of school will hurt the image of Cupertino schools. Please help to request CUSD to reconsider the closure of school. Thank you! Lijian Liu From:Jingjun Shu To:City Clerk; City Council Subject:3/15 City Council Meeting: Agenda Item #12 (CUSD) Date:Tuesday, March 15, 2022 6:54:18 PM 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 Honorable City Council, My son is a 5th grader at Meyerholz. According to the school's bell schedule (attached below), there is a total of EIGHT(8) lunch bells. To accommodate the large student body, the students are divided into 4 lunch groups, stacked with distinct start and end bells. To work around the inappropriately large number of lunch bells, Meyerholz limits breaks, so the students stay inside for 2 hours straight, 3 times a day. The campus also has an alarmingly large number of portable classrooms. Our school, and most of the schools within CUSD are already too crowded, and the infrastructure of most campuses can't hold more than 500 students. Closing schools make this matter worse. Please treat our young students with respect and dignity. Thank you. Joan From:Aegean Lee To:City Council; City Clerk Subject:Cupertino Unit School District is going off the education path - Parents and Children are suffering their crazy power Date:Tuesday, March 15, 2022 6:45:42 PM Attachments:Meyerholz_enrollment.png alt_enrollment2.png 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 council members, Our San Jose Meyerholz neighborhood community members are requesting for a special board meeting for school closure revote. CUSD is on a downward spiral if we don’t act NOW! • More families will choose other districts with smaller schools and smaller classes. • More families will choose private schools which value customer feedback. • More neighborhood schools will be closed since these three recallees treat schools as valuable real estate to sell / lease • More families will leave CUSD as decisions are dominated by these three recallees who put student learning and wellbeing LAST • Future parcel tax and bond measures will fail since the CUSD school board has lost voters’ confidence. CUSD did not conduct the open 7-11 committee BEFORE the decisions were made on school closures, as done in most other school districts and is the intent of the Education Code. Decisions were made without sufficient transparency and community engagement while leaving many unanswered questions on potential favoritism or backroom deals. The two highly arguable/debatable reasons for closing Meyerholz are low enrollment and CUSD's financial status. However, the two originally highly debatable reasons became completely unfounded and groundless. 1. Financial Status: 1) CUSD holds a $45 Million budget surplus which is the highest in Santa Clara. 2) The five-year projection shows CUSD's projected fund ending balance for 2025-2026 is at $72M. Now CUSD's Financial Status is healthier than ever. There are no funding issues at all! 2. Low Enrollment: 1) CUSD focuses on Alternative schools and Alternative schools draw attendance from NBH schools like Meyerholz. Three of four alternative schools in CUSD are in West San Jose. 2) CUSD helped Montclaire and Blue Hills stabilize their enrollments, and these efforts started in 2017. However, CUSD has not provided any support to Meyerholz to stabilize enrollment, and in fact, some of the Meyerholz neighborhood students were turned away and overflowed to other schools. These are the enrollment of each school and Meyerholz enrollment since 2016. 3) Why enrollment is no longer an issue New Legislations are not taken under consideration, which will lead to a positive impact on the enrollment issue. AB-130 was signed by Governor Newsom on Oct 5, 2021: https://www.gov.ca.gov/2021/10/05/governor-newsom-signs-early-childhood-legislation- highlights-transformative-investments-in-early-learning/ “The California Comeback Plan includes investments to transform public schools into gateways of opportunity. As part of the Governor’s $123.9 billion Pre-K and K-12 education package, California will provide free, high-quality, inclusive pre-kindergarten for all four- year-olds, beginning in 2022-23 with full implementation anticipated by 2025-26. The plan also reduces class sizes, cutting adult-to-child ratios in half with at least an average of 1 adult for every 12 children, down from one for every 24 children.” CUSD will add one grade to each elementary school to provide free PreK for all four-year- olds; if kids attend PreK, it is very likely that they will attend the same elementary school. The enrollment in CUSD schools will potentially increase by ~20%. SB9 and SB10 (high-dense living, signed into law on September 16, 2021) and Proposition 19 (inheriting property from parents, approved in Nov 2020) will increase school enrollment as well. CUSD’s decision on school closure is based on the old enrollment projection, which was conducted before the above legislations took effect; and the new legislations weren't considered at all when the decision was made. If Meyerholz is closed, CUSD will have the largest enrollment compared to all neighboring school districts. Three West San Jose school kids will be packed in one campus. Every child deserves a good and equal learning environment. So, we're strongly urging all the board members to revoke the CUSD Resolution No. 21-22- 07. and start a motion to revote! Closing Meyerholz and all other NBH schools will have a long-lasting negative impact on the community members, especially young pupils, so please listen to the community's voice and do the right thing! Please put my email in public record Thank you Aegean From:Punam Verma To:City Council; City Clerk Subject:Fwd: Public Comment - Agenda Item #12 of March 15 Council Meeting Date:Tuesday, March 15, 2022 6:33:57 PM 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. Could you please add my forwarded email as well to public comments for agenda item #12 Thank you. Punam ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Punam Verma <punam.verma@gmail.com> Date: Tue, Mar 15, 2022 at 4:15 PM Subject: Public Comment - Agenda Item #12 of March 15 Council Meeting To: <citycouncil@cupertino.org> Dear City Council members, Thank you for listening to our concerns, and asking CUSD to reconsider the closing of Regnart Elementary school. CUSD's decision to close Regnart Elementary has been very disheartening. The school is being closed for no justified reason. The financials of CUSD are in great shape, which do not require any school to be closed in the district. Regnart elementary is one of the best elementary schools in California, ranked 8th in schooldigger.com. In fact not just the parents in our neighborhood, but also parents from outside want to send their kids to Regnart through open-enrollment. However, in the last two years, CUSD has for some unexplained reason denied enrollment to many kids wanting to enroll in Regnart Elementary. And, then the board made low enrollment as the reason to close Regnart. And, on top of that they decided to not close a school that had lower enrollment than Regnart Elementary, and worse infrastructure. The motivation of most young families to move to Cupertino are good schools in a friendly neighborhood. We are paying high taxes so that our kids get a good school environment. However, over-crowded schools and playgrounds, scenes of kids not having enough lunch tables, traffic safety issues around the school will discourage new families to move into Cupertino. School closure will definitely lead to decreasing enrollment in our city. The CUSD board has been making decisions based on favoritism rather than facts. The board did not care for our community, and ignored hundreds of our requests and pleas to not close the school. Their wrong decision is going to impact our kids and our City. Our kids need our neighborhood school. We would like our City leaders to stand with us and fight this unjustified closure of Regnart Elementary school. Thank you. Punam Verma From:Marieann Shovlin To:City Clerk; Darcy Paul; Cupertino City Manager"s Office; City Council Subject:Comments on March 15, 2022 Agenda Item 22-10586 Request to CUSD Board Date:Tuesday, March 15, 2022 6:30:53 PM 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. Re Agenda Item 22-10586 The comments specifying the objections to the CUSD School Board decision do not appear to be verified by actual events, meetings and CUSD investigations and decisions. Based on the inaccurate information in the letter, I would strongly object to having the School Board mandated to review their decision. There were meetings held, discussions held with city residents and resulting difficult decisions made last year. The list of obections was addressed last year. Revisiting this situation will not change the financial and demographic facts. It is past time to face the facts and accept the consequences of changes in populations. Marieann Shovlin 10277 Vista Knoll Blvd Cupertino, CA From:Liana Crabtree To:Darcy Paul; Liang Chao; Kitty Moore; Hung Wei; Jon Robert Willey Cc:City Clerk; City Attorney"s Office; Cupertino City Manager"s Office Subject:written communication for the 3/15/2022 Council Meeting, Agenda Item 13, Chamber Services Date:Tuesday, March 15, 2022 6:07:36 PM 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, Council Members Moore, Wei, and Willey: Please include my letter as part of public comment for the 3/15/2022 Council meeting, Agenda Item 13, "Consider report on Chamber services and payment ending 12/20/2021 and approval of Accounts Payable report". Here are my comments and questions which I hope can be addressed as part of this evening's discussion for Agenda Item 13: 1) The Staff Report states "Only 4 out of the 10 cities surveyed have a formal agreement in place (with local Chamber of Commerce organizations)", where Cupertino is not represented in the survey findings. It seems that of the six (6) cities without formal agreements (contracts?), four (4) cities have Chamber expenses that are limited to membership fees and total $1,000 or less per year, one (1) city has a lease agreement in lieu of a "formal agreement", and only one (1) city other than Cupertino has annual payments or fees exceeding $10,000 without also holding formal agreements with the respective Chamber organizations. 2) Does a Memorandum of Understanding (referenced on p 4 of the Staff Report) have the same legal authority as any other binding contract held by the City and a third-party service provider? Who signs a Memorandum of Understanding of behalf of the City and who is accountable in the event of a dispute? 3) From the City archive: CC Resolution 19-080 Accounts Payable, April 5, 2019, Item Number 719962, Payable to CUPERTINO CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, "logo, website hosting, database subscription, website design" account payable for transaction amount $25,215.47. What service did the Chamber provide for this fee? Was there a formal agreement approved by Council and signed by the Mayor for the services provided by the Chamber for the City? 4) The ilovecupertino.com website advertises the Cupertino e-gift card that can be purchased via a link at the website, then redeemed at local businesses. The list of participating businesses looks terrific, but seems short--just 12 businesses total (https://app.yiftee.com/gift-card/cupertino/locations). Could someone speak to how the businesses are recruited to participate in the e-gift card program? For example, are participating businesses required to be current members of the Cupertino Chamber of Commerce? It seems that the City and its residents would have interest in seeing all businesses able to participate in the e-gift card program, whereas the Cupertino Chamber of Commerce might have interest in limiting participation to only its member businesses. Thank you for your consideration of Agenda Item 13. Sincerely, Liana Crabtree Cupertino resident From:Jingjun Shu To:City Council Cc:City Clerk Subject:3/15 City Council Meeting: Agenda Item #12 (CUSD) Date:Tuesday, March 15, 2022 5:41:41 PM 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 Honorable City Council, I have been a member of CUSD community for over 20 years. CUSD's decision to close Regnart and Meyerholz is unlawful, unethical and groundless. The decision should be revoked. The board members failed to serve the CUSD community, and I support the recall of Trustee Phyllis Vogel and Trustee Lori Cunningham. Please put my email in public record. Thank you! Joan From:Alan Tsui To:City Clerk; Alan Tsui Subject:request to the CUSD board for reconsidering school closures with usnews.com ranking Date:Tuesday, March 15, 2022 5:01:12 PM 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 Officer, We agreed NOT to close schools (Regnart, Meyerholz, Muir) because they are good schools and have high ranking on usnews.com. If closure is unavoidable, the low ranking schools (John Muir, Eaton, Blue Hill) should be closed.. Thanks. Alan Elementary school ranking on usnews.com William Faria Elementary, 1.6miles #3 in California Elementary Schools Overall Score 99.96/100 Murdock-Portal Elementary, 3.1miles #8 in California Elementary Schools Overall Score 99.87/100 R. I. Meyerholz Elementary, 1.8miles #52 in California Elementary Schools Overall Score 99.08/100 Nelson S. Dilworth Elementary, 3.1miles #66 in California Elementary Schools Overall Score 98.83/100 L. P. Collins Elementary, 2.7miles #85 in California Elementary Schools Overall Score 98.48/100 William Regnart Elementary #114 in California Elementary Schools Overall Score 97.96/100 Stevens Creek Elementary, 3.9miles #157 in California Elementary Schools Overall Score 97.18/100 Abraham Lincoln Elementary, 1.8miles #160 in California Elementary Schools Overall Score 97.09/100 Garden Gate Elementary #168 in California Elementary Schools Overall Score 96.98/100 Louis E. Stocklmeir Elementary #172 in California Elementary Schools Overall Score 96.91/100 Montclaire Elementary #192 in California Elementary Schools Overall Score 96.53/100 John Muir Elementary #215 in California Elementary Schools Overall Score 96.08/100 C. B. Eaton Elementary #374 in California Elementary Schools Overall Score 93.26/100 Blue Hills Elementary #422 in California Elementary Schools Overall Score 92.39/100 From:yuxia sheng To:City Council Subject:Comment for item 12 on 3/15/2022 agenda: Please Save Regnart Date:Tuesday, March 15, 2022 3:58:40 PM 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 Sir/Madam, My name is Yuxia Sheng, I live at Elmsford Drive, Cupertino. I have a comment for item 12 of 3/15/2022 agenda: Please Save Regnart Elementary and DO NOT close the school! Thanks, Yuxia