Informational Meeting - This Sunday 2 PM to 4 PM and How to Revoke Signatures

Announcement: Informational Meeting, the CCSG Initiative Does Not Change Building Heights in Cupertino

 

When:            Sunday, 24 April 2016, from 2 PM to 4 PM

Location:       Dilworth Elementary School site, Waha Montessori School, Room 22

                       1101 Strayer Dr, San Jose, CA 95129

Note:              Waha Montessori School is accessible on the Dilworth Elementary School site from Tompkins Drive (northwest corner of the Dilworth school site)

 

Get your questions about maximum building heights in Cupertino answered at the informational meeting this weekend. We will show you why the CCSG Initiative does not change building heights in Cupertino, no matter what false language the City Council injected into ballot question for the CCSG Initiative on March 31 and April 5. 

Also come and find out how you can volunteer to help CCSG Initiative.

I Signed a Petition for a Developer-sponsored Initiative by Mistake and Need to Withdraw My Support

If you signed a petition to support developer-sponsored initiative, it is possible to withdraw your support, but you must act NOW. The CCSG Initiative volunteers collected all the signatures required to add the CCSG Initiative to the ballot in January 2016. If you signed a petition for a Cupertino development project after January 2016, you signed a developer-sponsored initiative petition. To withdraw support for a developer-sponsored initiative, print and complete the form available here revoke_initiative_signature.pdf.

 

Then, send the completed and signed form to the Santa Clara County Registrar of Voters at this address:

 

 Santa Clara County Registrar of Voters

1555 Berger Drive, Bldg 2

San Jose, C A 95112

ATTN: Voter Registration Dept.

 

Do not delay! The Registrar of Voters must receive your request(s) to withdraw support before the proponents for the developer-sponsored initiative(s) submit their completed petitions to the Office of the Cupertino City Clerk for processing. Reference only one developer-sponsored initiative per form, though you can send multiple completed forms in the same envelope.

Home Page: CCSensibleGrowth.org and BetterCupertino.org

Paid for by Committee supporting Cupertino Citizens' Sensible Growth Initiative, PO Box 1132, Cupertino, CA 95015, FPPC# 1381645.

Look at the Facts: Sand Hill versus the Integrity of the City Council

​

Look at the Facts: Sand Hill versus the Integrity of the City Council

Whose side was the Cupertino City Council on?

The goal of the Cupertino Citizens' Sensible Growth CCSG Initiative (CCSG Initiative) is to strengthen the existing city General Plan by specifying building densities, heights, lot coverage, setbacks, and other elements to provide for gradual and well-planned city-wide development. Unfortunately, a three-vote majority of the Cupertino City Council chose to side with attorneys representing developer Sand Hill and to ignore the Elections Code requirement for a ballot question to be true, impartial, and not prejudicial. Sand Hill’s claim that the CCSG Initiative would “increase maximum height of residential neighborhoods” a glaring misread of the General Plan and the CCSG Initiative text.

Fact Sheet - Building Heights and Elections Code Violation (Concise).pdf

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7RMc9DXGhUAN1B4WHVyWHdIa3M/view?usp=sharing (PDF)

White Paper Concerning City Actions Concerning the Ballot Question

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7RMc9DXGhUAVDItcjJMZjVyYlU/view?usp=sharing (PDF)

FACT 1: The CCSG Initiative does not increase building heights in Cupertino. From Page 5 of the CCSG Initiative, Policy LU-3.0: Community Form:

“The maximum heights and densities for the special areas shown in the Community Form Diagram (Figure LU-1) shall not be exceeded. Outside of the Special Areas shown in Figure LU-1, building heights may not exceed 45 feet.”  

Figure LU-1, which is reused in the CCSG Initiative exactly as it was approved by the Council as part of an amendment to the General Plan on October 20, 2015, shows “Neighborhoods” under a list of special areas and in a box identifying the maximum height in the Neighborhoods as 30 feet. The General Plan amendment approved on October 20, 2015 set maximum building heights in Neighborhoods at 30 feet, which is unchanged by the CCSG Initiative.

Fact Sheet - CCSGI Does Not Increase Building Heights.pdf
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7RMc9DXGhUATEFnWjV2eTB2YUU/view?usp=sharing

The text in the CCSG Initiative is very clear and specific. Sand Hill's attorneys interpreted Policy LU3.0 by removing "shown in the Community Form Diagram (Figure LU-1)" to twist its meaning.

FACT 2: Elections Code 9051 states the 75-word ballot question "shall be a condensed version of the ballot title and summary" and the City Attorney "shall give a true and impartial statement of the purpose of the measure in such language that the ballot title and summary shall neither be an argument, nor be likely to create prejudice, for or against the proposed measure."

Fact Sheet - Ballot Question Violates Elections Code 9051.pdf
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7RMc9DXGhUAUHV0cmJzQzRMWjA/view?usp=sharing

FACT 3: Mr. Hom, the City Attorney and Mr. Perlmutter, outside counsel hired by the City, both recommended against stating that CCSG Initiative "increases" building height in the ballot question. Both said they are more comfortable to say “establish”, citing Elections Code 9051.

FACT 4: Moments before the March 31 Council meeting, Sand Hill's attorneys sent a request to change the ballot question. The City amended the impartial description prepared by the City Attorney to state that CCSG Initiative will "establish" a building height of 45 feet in Neighborhoods, which comes from the Election Code 9212 report, not the CCSG Initiative text.

FACT 5: Councilmembers Barry Chang and Gilbert Wong called the April 5 special meeting to change the ballot question, providing the CCSG Initiative supporters only a 12-hour courtesy notice. During the meeting, a three-vote majority (Chang, Wong, and Rod Sinks) of Council members sided with Sand Hill's attorneys to change the ballot question to state that the CCSG Initiative increases maximum building heights.

FACT 6: The ballot question adopted on April 5 for the CCSG Initiative now includes the false text “increase to 45 feet maximum building height in Neighborhoods”.

The false words “increase to 45 feet maximum building height in the Neighborhoods” was introduced by developer Sand Hill to prejudice the voters against the CCSG Initiative. The events preceding the adoption of the deceptive ballot question prove that the false words of one developer have more power than the truth of the General Plan and the Council’s own voting record for a majority of Council members. (Note: "Neighborhoods" is a specific label in the General Plan, not the normal sense of "neighborhoods".)

The passage of the CCSG Initiative, which will require voter approval for land use decisions affecting building density, is more important than ever to protect Cupertino’s future from being exploited by profit-driven developers.

Related Blogs:

If I am Allowed to Dream... Shopping Mall I Wish for (Nextdoor Post)

http://bettercupertino.blogspot.com/2016/04/if-i-am-allowed-to-dream-shopping-mall.html

White Paper Concerning City Actions Concerning the Ballot Question
Blog: http://bettercupertino.blogspot.com/2016/04/cupertino-council-adopted-deceptive-ballot-question-ccsgi.html
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7RMc9DXGhUAVDItcjJMZjVyYlU/view?usp=sharing (PDF)

Fact Sheet: Sand Hill versus the Integrity of the City Council
Blog:http://bettercupertino.blogspot.com/2016/04/fact-sheet-sand-hill-versus-integrity.html
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7RMc9DXGhUASmhaZV9ua0tjWWc/view?usp=sharing (PDF)

Fact Sheet: CCSG Initiative Does Not Increase Building Heights

Blog: http://bettercupertino.blogspot.com/2016/04/ccsgi-does-not-increase-building-heights.html

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7RMc9DXGhUATEFnWjV2eTB2YUU/view?usp=sharing (PDF)

Fact Sheet: Ballot Question for CCSG Initiative Violates Elections Code 9051

Blog: http://bettercupertino.blogspot.com/2016/04/fact-sheet-elections-code-and-ballot-question.html
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7RMc9DXGhUAUHV0cmJzQzRMWjA/view?usp=sharing (PDF)

Home Page: CCSensibleGrowth.org and BetterCupertino.org

Paid for by Committee supporting Cupertino Citizens' Sensible Growth Initiative, PO Box 1132, Cupertino, CA 95015, FPPC# 1381645.

​

Press Release – What Led to Deceptive Ballot Question?

CCSensibleGrowth.org

Press Release – What Led to Deceptive Ballot Question?

April 8, 2016

Highlights: Cupertino City Council has misled voters with a deceptive ballot question for a city initiative measure. The measure was placed on the November 2016 election ballot by grassroots citizens. This ballot measure is of vital importance to residents in Cupertino and nearby communities because it would protect the city from uncontrolled growth. By misleading the voters, the City Council has damaged the measure’s chances of passing, severely jeopardizing the future of the suburban city of Cupertino. The negative impacts of continued unconstrained growth will also have serious ramifications affecting traffic gridlock, public safety, environmental risks, and other matters of importance to the entire Silicon Valley.

Discussion: In a hastily called special meeting on April 5, 2016, the Cupertino City Council, by a narrow 3-2 vote, passed a resolution to alter the 75-word ballot question for the Cupertino Citizens’ Sensible Growth Initiative (or CCSG Initiative). The 3-vote majority adopted ballot question wording submitted by attorneys representing Sand Hill’s Vallco office park Initiative Committee. In contrast to counter campaigns initiated by well-connected developers, the CCSG Initiative was prepared and circulated by grassroots citizens’ groups, and qualified for the November 2016 election with an all-volunteer campaign team of private citizens after only five weeks of signature collection.

Just five days earlier, on March 31, the City Council had adopted the 75-word ballot question for the CCSG Initiative by unanimous consent. In the March 31 meeting, the council rejected the neutral and balanced ballot question proposed by the City Attorney. Instead, influenced by Sand Hill’s attorney’s opinion letter, which in turn was based on a biased and inaccurate Elections Code Section 9212 Informational Report, modified the ballot question to make it less impartial. After that meeting, not satisfied with the damage already done, another team of attorneys, also representing Sand Hill’s Vallco office park Initiative Committee, sent in yet another letter proposing even more biased wording to further discredit the CCSG Initiative. On April 5, to the dismay of residents, a 3-person majority of the 5-person City Council sided with Sand Hill’s attorneys once again, and adopted the deceptive and extremely biased wording for the ballot question for the CCSG Initiative.

The goal of the CCSG Initiative, clearly understood by all parties involved, is to strengthen and support the existing city General Plan with concisely specified building densities, heights, lot coverage, setbacks, and other elements to provide for gradual and well-planned city-wide development, encouraging sensible, balanced, and long-term growth. The Sand Hill attorney’s assertion that the CCSG Initiative would “increase maximum height of residential buildings” was a blatant misreading of the measure’s meaning. Nothing could be further from the truth.

The technical details regarding the developers’ distorted legal interpretation of the CCSG Initiative will be provided upon request. In essence, the developers, who are attempting to qualify their own competing initiatives, crafted a ballot question to serve their own business interests. The powerful sway developers command in Cupertino has led to a regrettable decision by the City Council. The City Council’s decisions on March 31 and April 5 demonstrate how easily future decisions might be influenced by developers and other special interests. Therefore, the successful passage of the CCSG Initiative is even more important. We must ensure that the future direction of growth is not determined by the misdirection of three votes on the City Council.

The CCSG Initiative is a forward-looking General Plan amendment designed to ensure Cupertino will be revitalized according to the community’s vision, not the developers’ vision.

Please visit www.CCSensibleGrowth.org to learn more about the CCSG Initiative, find out about future events, and donate to support the passage of the CCSG Initiative in November 2016.

CCSensibleGrowth.org and BetterCupertino.org

Paid for by Committee supporting Cupertino Citizens' Sensible Growth Initiative, PO Box 1132, Cupertino, CA 95015, FPPC# 1381645.

CCSensibleGrowth.org

URGENT REQUEST!! - Attend Council Meeting TONIGHT - CCSGI Under Attack - SAVE CUPERTINO - Wear RED

​CCSensibleGrowth.org

URGENT REQUEST!! - Attend Council Meeting TONIGHT

CCSGI Under Attack - SAVE CUPERTINO - Wear RED

Cupertino Council Meeting to amend the ballot language just adopted on March 31, 2016

Location: Community Hall (next to Cupertino Library)

Date: April 5, 2016 (TONIGHT)

Time: Any time right after regular 6:45PM Council meeting. (NOT 9 PM.)

With days short of the 3-day meeting notice required by the Brown Act, the City has added a new item to tonight's meeting agenda to amend the ballot question for the CCSG Initiative that was adopted on March 31, 2016 after public comments and Council deliberation. To grant themselves permission to violate the Brown Act, the City added the new agenda item as a "special meeting" to immediately following the regularly scheduled City Council meeting at 6:45 PM tonight. Special meetings, which have a 24-hour notification window as provided by the Municipal Code, are intended to be reserved for issues that must be resolved immediately. 

However, tonight's special meeting will be squandered to address the false claim that the Cupertino Citizens' Sensible growth Growth Initiative (CCSG Initiative) will increase building heights in the community and to sabotage the grassroots citizens' efforts to present the CCSG Initiative using inaccurate, biased language on the November 2016 ballot. Note: Final ballot questions are not due to the Registrar of Voters until August 2016. And yet, tonight, we have a special meeting to decide ballot language that is not due for four (4) months.

The CCSG Initiative will ensure that Cupertino is revitalized to align with the  community's vision, not the developers' vision. Contrary to the misstatements made in the draft ballot language approved by the City Council, the text of the CCSG Initiative does not increase the existing 30 foot building height limit in Cupertino’s neighborhoods. The CCSG Initiative allows the voters to be engaged fully in determining the future direction of Cupertino.  We will ask the City Council to correct their error at tonight’s special City Council meeting at 9 pm in the Cupertino Community Hall, and hope we hope you will attend to show your support.

Wear RED and attend tonight's "special meeting" to support grassroots citizens' effort to protect the future of Cupertino. See you at the Cupertino Community Hall at 9 PM, Tuesday, April 5, 2016.

Home: CCSensibleGrowth.org and BetterCupertino.org

Questions: CCSensibleGrowth@gmail.com

Paid for by Committee supporting Cupertino Citizens' Sensible Growth Initiative, PO Box 1132, Cupertino, CA 95015, FPPC# 1381645. 

​CCSensibleGrowth.org

Wear RED to Support CCSGI and Oppose Vallco Initiative - Your Presence Is Essential

​CCSensibleGrowth.org

Wear RED to Support CCSGI and Oppose Vallco Initiative - Your Presence Is Essential

Attend March 31, 2016 Cupertino City Council Meeting

Time: 6:45pm March 31, 2016

Location: Community Hall (next to Cupertino Library)

Sand Hill has sent a call-to-action to implore Vallco Town Center Initiative supporters (could include paid out-of-town "supporters") to attend the March 31, 2016 City Council meeting to oppose the Cupertino Citizens' Sensible Growth Initiative (CCSG Initiative). We need all CCSG Initiative supporters to attend the City Council meeting to object to the developer-sponsored Vallco office park initiative that will replace a shopping center with a massive office park. It's a show down. Your presence is essential to protect Cupertino from being turned into Manhattan West.

The CCSG Initiative will allow Vallco to be revitalized in a manner that is aligned with the community's vision and will allow Cupertino to grow sensibly in accordance with the community's vision. Don't let the future of Vallco be locked down by one developer's proposal of a massive office park without an environmental impact review or the City Council's approval. Don't let Cupertino fall into a long nightmare of traffic congestion and more and more state-mandated housing requirements due to more massive office construction. Attend the March 31, 2016 City Council meeting to oppose the Vallco office park initiative.

On Thursday March 31, 2016, the City Council will decide whether or not (1) to adopt the CCSG Initiative immediately, (2) to add the CCSG Initiative the November ballot, or (3) to identify roadblocks they will use to prevent the CCSG Initiative from moving forward. The CCSG Initiative Election Code 9212 Impact Report (9212 report)  is not only biased, but also contains false accusations and impossible, worst-case assumptions for the CCSG Initiative. Our attorney has written a letter to the City to refute the most egregious and false assertions in the CCSG Initiative 9212 report: 

Important Information About the CCSG Initiative correcting Misrepresentations in the CCSG Initiative Section 9212 Report:

•     The CCSG Initiative will not increase any existing building height limit set by zoning in any area in Cupertino. Anyone who claims the CCSG Initiative will raise building height limits in some areas, including Neighborhoods, lacks a basic understanding of the function of the General Plan and what it mandates or prohibits.  Based on the language in the CCSG Initiative, only zoning that set height limits above those in the initiative would need to be changed.

•     In places where the CCSG Initiative removes a requirement from the General Plan, such as the requirement for projects to identify a master developer or draft a town-center layout, neither the developer nor the City is prevented or prohibited from appointing a master developer, adopting a town-center layout, or providing any deliverable that was previously required.

•     Both Housing Element Scenarios A and B were adopted by the City and are part of the General Plan in December 2014. Any inconsistency resulting from a transition from Scenario A to Scenario B can be resolved by the City using its normal processes. Actions required by the City to harmonize the transition from Scenario A to Scenario B are legal and outside the scope of the CCSG Initiative.

The CCSG Initiative 9212 report is full of other unreasonable and biased characterizations of the CCSG Initiative. We will do our best address the most serious errors during Thursday's Council meeting.

Home: CCSensibleGrowth.org and BetterCupertino.org
Questions: CCSensibleGrowth@gmail.com

Paid for by Committee supporting Cupertino Citizens' Sensible Growth Initiative, PO Box 1132, Cupertino, CA 95015, FPPC# 1381645. 

​CCSensibleGrowth.org

Thank You Donors for More Than $6000 in 24 Hours. Attend March 31 Council Meeting to Oppose Vallco Initiative and Support CCSGI

​CCSensibleGrowth.org

Thank You for Doubling Our 24-Hour Goal

The 24-Hour Fund Matching Campaign has raised $4426 dollars in 24 hours double our goal of $2000. Together we've raised $6426 within just 24 hours. Thank you to the generous donation of every donor. And special thanks for the anonymous donor for providing the $2000 matching fund. Every dollar of your donation will be put into attorney fees or outreach to more voters to protect our beloved Cupertino.

$100 Per Household Campaign Ends on March 31

If you have not donated to CCSGI, we encourage you to donate by March 31. Each round of mailers to all registered voters will cost $10,000. The more donation would enable us to reach more voters so that they are not confused by developers' empty promises on their glossy flyers.

Attend March 31 Council Meeting to Oppose Vallco Initiative and Support CCSGI

On Thursday, March 31, 2016 at 6:45pm, a special City Council Meeting will be held for the Council to take the next action on CCSGI after reviewing the Election Code 9212 Impact Report. The Council can either adopt CCSGI right away or put CCSGI on the November ballot. In the same meeting, the Council will also order 9212 Impact Report for Sand Hill's Vallco Town Center Specific Plan Initiative.

It is important for all who strongly oppose Sand Hill's Vallco Town Center Specific Plan Initiative to speak up to object the developers for abusing the initiative process for their personal financial gain. Speak up on issues that should be covered in the 9212 Impact Report. All those who object to the Council's allocation of 2 million square feet of office at Vallco without sufficient public input in Dec. 2014 should also speak up because it was that massive office allocation that put Cupertino on the path of urbanization, with The Hills of Vallco leading the way.

A - Proposed Vallco Initiative (334 page Initiative to be adopted into law)
B - Title and Summary

The 9212 Impact Report for CCSGI is very biasd and full of misinformation as expected, just as what other community groups have warned. The 9212 Impact Report is supposed to be impartial and the City is supposed to be neutral. Unfortunately, more often than not, impartiality and neutrality are hard when a citizens' initiative is proposed due to an unresponsive government. For all who are concerned about the successful passage of CCSGI, we would like you to exercise judgement when reading the 9212 Impact Report authored by paid consultants whose clients also include cities as well as real estate developers.

Here is the packets for Agenda Item 2: 9212 Impact Report for CCSGI
https://cupertino.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=2676096&GUID=1273C787-DBA1-40D9-9793-264D26DAC861&Options=&Search=

In the mean time, the CCSGI committee and their attorneys stand by the content posted on CCSensibleGrowth.org:

What the initiative WILL Do:

• It WILL encourage projects that adhere to the Cupertino General Plan.

• It WILL require voters’ approval for over-sized projects that violate the standards in the Cupertino General Plan that are set by the initiative.

• It WILL affirm the City's goal of enhancing Vallco as a regional and community destination for retail, dining, and entertainment.
• It WILL increase sales tax revenue by retaining Vallco as a regional shopping mall.
• It WILL retain the existing height limits, to preserve the character of Cupertino, while promoting balanced growth.

• It WILL help prevent further traffic gridlock through sensible and balanced growth that respects the City’s infrastructure limits.

• It WILL help prevent additional overcrowding of public schools through sensible and balanced growth that respects the City’s infrastructure limits.

What the initiative WILL NOT Do:

• It WILL NOT stop any development project that abides by the limits it sets within the General Plan.
• It WILL NOT stop any project. It only requires that City Council approval of over-sized projects be confirmed by Cupertino’s voters.
• It WILL NOT take away City Council’s ability to increase citywide office allocation, residential allocation or hotel or retail allocation.
• It WILL NOT change the existing maximum height, except at Vallco.  At Vallco  there are currently no height guidelines.

• It WILL NOT prevent Vallco from having housing or office.  Housing or office at Vallco would be allowed if approved by a majority of voters.

• It WILL NOT prevent growth.  The initiative just re-enforces the City’s current plan so that growth is sustainable.

Home: CCSensibleGrowth.org and BetterCupertino.org

Questions: CCSensibleGrowth@gmail.com

Paid for by Committee supporting Cupertino Citizens' Sensible Growth Initiative, PO Box 1132, Cupertino, CA 95015, FPPC# 1381645. 

​CCSensibleGrowth.org

DONATE BY NOON MONDAY to Get Matching Fund from Anonymous Donor

 Newsupdate for BetterCupertino.org and CCSensibleGrowth.org 

Information Booth Cancellation: The BetterCupertino/CCSGI Information Booth at the Cupertino Library is cancelled today because the Cupertino Library is closed in observance of the Easter holiday. Please emailBetterCupertino@gmail.com to get more flyers for distribution.

Exciting Fundraising News: An anonymous donor will match up to $2,000 for contributions donated in support of CCSGI between noon Sunday (3/27) and noon Monday (3/28). 

Donate online at http://tiny.cc/ccsgi-donate or donate by check. Your check can be mailed in after filling out an online donation form before noon on Monday.

Thank you to all CCSGI supporters for your generous donations. We depend on donor funding to pay our attorney to scrutinize the very biased Election Code 9212 Impact Report that will be presented to the City Council Thursday, 3/31. Stay tuned for more information about the EC 9212 Impact Report.

Watch out for Paid Circulators for Developers' Initiatives:Paid circulators hired by developers are attempting to collect petition signatures right now. With approximately 2,700 valid signatures, developer-sponsored initiatives that will change Cupertino's General Plan could be added to the ballot in 2016 without any environmental impact review for traffic, schools, emergency, police, sewage and other infrastructures. Your signatures on the developers' Initiative encourage more developers' to take the shortcut of project approval by abusing the initiative process. By NOT signing the developers' initiative to put their project on the ballot, Cupertino City can negotiate even better community benefits than the developers are offering now.

What's inside the developer-sponsored initiatives?

Under the Vallco office park initiative, the Vallco Shopping District will become 50% office, 34% apartments and ONLY 16% retail. The 2-million-square-foot office park is expected to employ 10,000 workers (200 sq.ft./worker), while only 389 are included in the plan, further exacerbating the area's housing-to-office deficit by providing enough housing for 5% of the employees who will work in the offices on the site.

Under the Oaks initiative, the Oaks Shopping Center will become 45% office, 31% apartments, 16% hotel and ONLY 8% retail. The 280,000-square-foot office is expected to employ 1,400 workers, where the project includes enough housing (270 apartments) for just 20% of the employees who will work in the offices on the site.

Both the initiatives for the Oaks and Vallco projects will turn Cupertino an urbanized city by adding:

• More traffic congestion
• More crowded schools
• Much less retail space
• Worse housing crisis
• Less civil services
• Less safety and emergency services.

If you have signed ANY developer-sponsored initiatives by mistake, you can revoke your signatures. Contact BetterCupertino@gmail.com to find out how.

Here are the flyers for distribution:

DO NOT SIGN - more detailed project info (some info on CCSGI):
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7RMc9DXGhUAN3NtUUxJYW9jR1E/view?usp=sharing

(CCSGI = Cupertino Citizens' Sensible Growth Initiative)

DO NOT SIGN - Urbanized City: (No information on CCSGI)
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7RMc9DXGhUAYWxoZUtVUGlNU0k/view?usp=sharing

Home: BetterCupertino.org
Questions: BetterCupertino@gmail.com

Paid for by Cupertino Residents for Sensible Zoning Action Committee, PO Box 1132, Cupertino, CA 95015, FPPC #1376003.