Request to open an investigation into potential violations of the Brown Act

This is a formal letter to request the District Attorney to open an investigation into potential violations of the Brown Act. Dear Deputy District Attorney Chase, This is to request your office to look into the potential violation of the state law, Ralph M. Brown Act, by three members of the Cupertino City Council Savita Videorecorder, Barry Chang and Rod Sinks who together held a private meeting with the attendance of Cupertino Planning Commissioner Don Sun, California Assemblyman Evan Low to discuss business strategy related to a development plan currently under consideration of the Cupertino City Council.  They have also invited a senior executive with Sand Hill Property Nandy Kumar READ MORE

关于Referendum的新闻公告(Chinese version)

9月19日,Cupertino市议会以3:2的投票结果通过了Vallco购物中心的重建计划(又称Vallco市中心计划)。这个新批准的项目规模甚至比2016年被选民否决的D提案还要大。它的建筑面积超过D提案40%,建筑高度超出60%,而商业零售面积则只有整个项目的4%,并且根本没有公园绿地。 市民们责怪市议会完全没有负担起来自己应尽的责任。比如,在文件一读之后立刻投票,根本不等两周后的会议开启文件二读再投票。比如,罔顾民意要求澄清库市城建整体计划(GPA)和Vallco所在地的zoning规则。市议会之所以如此急迫开启投票,就是因为恐惧11月的市议会换届选举之后,5人市议会的多数票将掌握在为市民说话的市议员手中。而且,这个被投票的Vallco改造计划细节一直被秘密封存,直到市议会开会前一周才被公开放出来,所以市民根本没有时间了解这个项目详情。更过分的是,在这个计划里面,市议会也根本没有加入任何强制性的合约内容,强制开发商必须在项目中兴建低收入住房或者必须兑现他们现在承诺的各种社区福利。 这个被通过的项目包括: ∎ 多个高层建筑,最高楼层达到14层 ∎ 2,668个住宅公寓单元 ∎ 1.75million平方英尺的办公面积,足以容纳10,000到12,000员工上班(增加的办公面积引入的办公人口将远远超出项目住宅面积所能引入的人口,也就是说,会造成本地“房荒危机”更加严重) ∎ 18个新的道路交叉口 ∎ 可能会在Vallco地区每天增加80,000车流 ∎ 严重的空气污染,噪声污染,还有可能的有害垃圾泄露等等问题 Cupertino当地的草根组织更好库市(Better Cupertino)相信本市市民应该有权利对这样一个超大超密的项目说不,所以正在准备一份反对Vallco现有计划的公投(Referendum)。一旦城市方对Vallco的项目批准文件正式生效,市民方只需在一个月内收集到10%的本市选民签名,便可把这个项目议题放上公投选票。

Press Release on Referendum

September 24, 2018 A plan to redevelop Cupertino’s Vallco shopping mall (Vallco Town Center), was approved by City Council by a 3-2 vote September 19. The project is substantially larger than a 2016 ballot measure rejected by voters, Measure D. The newly approved plan has 40% more square footage and is 65% taller than Measure D, but offers less than 4% retail space, and almost no parkland. Citizens complain that City Council threw aside its own rules — by holding the second hearing and voting on the project the day after the first hearing (instead of allowing the usual two-week gap between council meetings), READ MORE