The false interpretation of the EC 9212 Report could be derived from an out-dated General Plan on the city website.
Liana spoke to both Councilmembers Rod Sinks and Barry Chang in person and both of them agreed that it is something worth looking into and asked Liana to send them more information.
-------------------------------
From: Liana Crabtree
Date: Sun, May 1, 2016 at 12:25 PM
Subject: request for a special meeting, Tuesday, May 3, to amend ballot question for the CCSG Initiative (includes justification)
To: "bchang@cupertino.org" <bchang@cupertino.org>, "svaidhyanathan@cupertino.org" <svaidhyanathan@cupertino.org>, "rsinks@cupertino.org" <rsinks@cupertino.org>, "gwong@cupertino.org" <gwong@cupertino.org>, "dpaul@cupertino.org" <dpaul@cupertino.org>
Cc: City Clerk <cityclerk@cupertino.org>, "manager@cupertino.org" <manager@cupertino.org>, Liang Chao <lfchao@gmail.com>, Joan Lawler <joan.lawler@gmail.com>, Peggy Griffin <griffin@compuserve.com>
Date: Sun, May 1, 2016 at 12:25 PM
Subject: request for a special meeting, Tuesday, May 3, to amend ballot question for the CCSG Initiative (includes justification)
To: "bchang@cupertino.org" <bchang@cupertino.org>, "svaidhyanathan@cupertino.org" <svaidhyanathan@cupertino.org>, "rsinks@cupertino.org" <rsinks@cupertino.org>, "gwong@cupertino.org" <gwong@cupertino.org>, "dpaul@cupertino.org" <dpaul@cupertino.org>
Cc: City Clerk <cityclerk@cupertino.org>, "manager@cupertino.org" <manager@cupertino.org>, Liang Chao <lfchao@gmail.com>, Joan Lawler <joan.lawler@gmail.com>, Peggy Griffin <griffin@compuserve.com>
Good Afternoon Mayor Chang, Vice Mayor Vaidhyanathan, and Council Members Paul, Sinks, and Wong:
Mayor Chang, thank you for meeting with a small group of supporters for the Cupertino Citizens' Sensible Growth Initiative (CCSG Initiative) this morning to discuss why the phrase "increase to 45 feet the maximum building height in the Neighborhoods" is false and deceptive and why it needs to be removed from the ballot label (ballot question) for the CCSG Initiative.
Council Member Sinks, thank you for taking the time during the Earth Day festivities yesterday to talk with me about why the phrase "increase to 45 feet the maximum building height in the Neighborhoods" is false and deceptive and why it needs to be removed from the ballot question for the CCSG Initiative.
I am writing to all Council Members today to request that a sufficient number of you (my understanding from today's meeting with Mayor Chang, two are required) agree to request a a special meeting on Tuesday, May 3, 2016 at 9 pm following the regularly scheduled City Council meeting. The purpose of the special meeting is to remove the false and deceptive phrase "increase to 45 feet the maximum building height in the Neighborhoods" from the ballot label (ballot question).
The justification for the City Council to amend the ballot question for the CCGG Initiative is based on our group's assertion that it is possible the team responsible for the EC 9212 report, which is the guidance some Council Members followed when they added language about maximum building heights to the ballot question, referenced the December 2014 version of the General Plan that is published on the City of Cupertino Web site without amendment and not the October 2015 version of the General Plan, which is the General Plan of record today and at the time of the drafting of the CCSG Initiative.
As Mayor Chang and Council Member Sinks are aware, the General Plan amendment adopted in October 2015 (October 2015 GPA) as part of Resolution 15-087 includes an update to Figure LU-1 to add a special areas box called "Neighborhoods" where residential density and criteria are defined. The Neighborhoods special area is a super set comprised of the 12 neighborhoods that are also defined in the October 2015 GPA. With the addition of the Neighborhoods special areas box, the October 2015 GPA established that residential densities and criteria will be defined in Figure LU-1. In the Neighborhoods special area on Figure LU-1, maximum residential densities and criteria are defined as "15 units per acre for Neighborhood Commercial Sites" with a maximum height of "30 feet".
The CCSG Initiative includes Figure LU-1 exactly as it appears in the October 2015 GPA.
The relevant text from the CCSG Initiative, Policy LU-3.0 Community Form, related to maximum building heights says, "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."
Because the current version of Figure LU-1 now includes the special area called Neighborhoods, the area defined in the CCSG Initiative as "outside of Special Areas" is very small and might include real estate adjacent to freeway interchanges or other undeveloped areas that are under Cupertino's jurisdiction but have not been assigned a land use designation. "Outside of the special areas" is an important part of the CCSG Initiative because any land annexed to Cupertino in the future will be introduced with the building density maximum of 45 feet.
The CCSG Initiative and the Title and Summary for the CCSG Initiative prepared by the City Attorney include no proclamations that the CCSG Initiative will "establish" or "increase" building heights in Cupertino.
Elections Code 9051 requires that the responsible body assigned the responsibility of approving the title and summary, and by extension, the ballot question ensure that the language "shall neither be an argument, nor be likely to create prejudice, for or against the proposed measure".
As written today, the ballot question for the CCSG Initiative is false and deceptive because it includes the phrase "increase to 45 feet the maximum building height in the Neighborhoods," which is not supported by the content of the CCSG Initiative, the content of the Title and Summary for the CCSG Initiative as prepared by the City Attorney, or the content of the General Plan of record today and at the time of the drafting of the CCSG Initiative.
I urge all Council Members to act promptly to take the required actions to amend the ballot question for the CCSG Initiative to remove the false and deceptive language "increase to 45 feet the maximum building height in the Neighborhoods".
Mayor Chang, thank you for meeting with a small group of supporters for the Cupertino Citizens' Sensible Growth Initiative (CCSG Initiative) this morning to discuss why the phrase "increase to 45 feet the maximum building height in the Neighborhoods" is false and deceptive and why it needs to be removed from the ballot label (ballot question) for the CCSG Initiative.
Council Member Sinks, thank you for taking the time during the Earth Day festivities yesterday to talk with me about why the phrase "increase to 45 feet the maximum building height in the Neighborhoods" is false and deceptive and why it needs to be removed from the ballot question for the CCSG Initiative.
I am writing to all Council Members today to request that a sufficient number of you (my understanding from today's meeting with Mayor Chang, two are required) agree to request a a special meeting on Tuesday, May 3, 2016 at 9 pm following the regularly scheduled City Council meeting. The purpose of the special meeting is to remove the false and deceptive phrase "increase to 45 feet the maximum building height in the Neighborhoods" from the ballot label (ballot question).
The justification for the City Council to amend the ballot question for the CCGG Initiative is based on our group's assertion that it is possible the team responsible for the EC 9212 report, which is the guidance some Council Members followed when they added language about maximum building heights to the ballot question, referenced the December 2014 version of the General Plan that is published on the City of Cupertino Web site without amendment and not the October 2015 version of the General Plan, which is the General Plan of record today and at the time of the drafting of the CCSG Initiative.
As Mayor Chang and Council Member Sinks are aware, the General Plan amendment adopted in October 2015 (October 2015 GPA) as part of Resolution 15-087 includes an update to Figure LU-1 to add a special areas box called "Neighborhoods" where residential density and criteria are defined. The Neighborhoods special area is a super set comprised of the 12 neighborhoods that are also defined in the October 2015 GPA. With the addition of the Neighborhoods special areas box, the October 2015 GPA established that residential densities and criteria will be defined in Figure LU-1. In the Neighborhoods special area on Figure LU-1, maximum residential densities and criteria are defined as "15 units per acre for Neighborhood Commercial Sites" with a maximum height of "30 feet".
The CCSG Initiative includes Figure LU-1 exactly as it appears in the October 2015 GPA.
The relevant text from the CCSG Initiative, Policy LU-3.0 Community Form, related to maximum building heights says, "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."
Because the current version of Figure LU-1 now includes the special area called Neighborhoods, the area defined in the CCSG Initiative as "outside of Special Areas" is very small and might include real estate adjacent to freeway interchanges or other undeveloped areas that are under Cupertino's jurisdiction but have not been assigned a land use designation. "Outside of the special areas" is an important part of the CCSG Initiative because any land annexed to Cupertino in the future will be introduced with the building density maximum of 45 feet.
The CCSG Initiative and the Title and Summary for the CCSG Initiative prepared by the City Attorney include no proclamations that the CCSG Initiative will "establish" or "increase" building heights in Cupertino.
Elections Code 9051 requires that the responsible body assigned the responsibility of approving the title and summary, and by extension, the ballot question ensure that the language "shall neither be an argument, nor be likely to create prejudice, for or against the proposed measure".
As written today, the ballot question for the CCSG Initiative is false and deceptive because it includes the phrase "increase to 45 feet the maximum building height in the Neighborhoods," which is not supported by the content of the CCSG Initiative, the content of the Title and Summary for the CCSG Initiative as prepared by the City Attorney, or the content of the General Plan of record today and at the time of the drafting of the CCSG Initiative.
I urge all Council Members to act promptly to take the required actions to amend the ballot question for the CCSG Initiative to remove the false and deceptive language "increase to 45 feet the maximum building height in the Neighborhoods".
Thank you,
Liana Crabtree
Cupertino resident
REFERENCES
+ current October 2015 GPA, Figure LU-1, see PDF p 40.
(Link: http://64.165.34.13/weblink/0/
Note that the October 2015 GPA includes the following statement on PDF p 4, item 3 under the heading "NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED":
"3. Adopts the amendments to the General Plan (Application No. GPA-2015-01), text and figures, as shown in Exhibit GPA-1, which is incorporated herein by reference as part of this resolution, and authorizes staff to make grammatical, typographical, numbering, and formatting changes necessary to assist in production of the final published General Plan;"
+ outdated Community Vision 2040 (General Plan approved in December 2014), Chapter 3 "Land Use and Community Design Element", Figure LU-1, see PDF p 18.
(Link: http://www.cupertino.org/
It appears that as of today, May 1, 2016, the exercise to update the final published General Plan approved in December 2014 with the amendments approved in Resolution 15-087 has not been completed. As a result, the Community Vision 2040, Chapter 3 "Land Use and Community Design Element" includes the previous version of Figure LU-1 that does not include the Neighborhoods special areas box where residential densities and criteria would later be defined in the October 2015 GPA.
If those responsible for preparing the EC 9212 report referenced the outdated Figure LU-1 included in the now outdated Chapter 3 of the General Plan approved in December 2014, the statement "increase to 45 feet the maximum building height in the Neighborhoods" could be argued to be true because in December 2014, Figure LU-1 did not include the Neighborhoods special areas. As a result, for the window of time between December 4, 2014 and October 20, 2015, residential densities and criteria for neighborhoods is not defined in Figure LU-1 and the Neighborhoods special area did not exist.
+ CCSG Initiative, Policy LU-1 Community Form, see PDF p 5; and Figure LU-1 exactly as it was approved in the October 2015 GPA, see PDF p 6.
(Link: http://www.cupertino.org/inc/
+ Title and Summary for the CCSG Initiative as prepared by the City Attorney. The Title and Summary for the CCSG Initiative, which is intended to be the basis for the ballot question according to Elections Code 9051, includes no references to "establishing" or "increasing" building heights in neighborhoods.
(Link: http://www.cupertino.org/inc/
+ Elections Code 9051.
(Link: http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-
Relevant items as applied to the drafting of the ballot question for the CCSG Initiative include:
"(b) The ballot label shall not contain more than 75 words and shall be a condensed version of the ballot title and summary including the financial impact summary prepared pursuant to Section 9087 of this code and Section 88003 of the Government Code.
(c) In providing the ballot title and summary, the Attorney General 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."
Liana Crabtree
Cupertino resident
REFERENCES
+ current October 2015 GPA, Figure LU-1, see PDF p 40.
(Link: http://64.165.34.13/weblink/0/
Note that the October 2015 GPA includes the following statement on PDF p 4, item 3 under the heading "NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED":
"3. Adopts the amendments to the General Plan (Application No. GPA-2015-01), text and figures, as shown in Exhibit GPA-1, which is incorporated herein by reference as part of this resolution, and authorizes staff to make grammatical, typographical, numbering, and formatting changes necessary to assist in production of the final published General Plan;"
+ outdated Community Vision 2040 (General Plan approved in December 2014), Chapter 3 "Land Use and Community Design Element", Figure LU-1, see PDF p 18.
(Link: http://www.cupertino.org/
It appears that as of today, May 1, 2016, the exercise to update the final published General Plan approved in December 2014 with the amendments approved in Resolution 15-087 has not been completed. As a result, the Community Vision 2040, Chapter 3 "Land Use and Community Design Element" includes the previous version of Figure LU-1 that does not include the Neighborhoods special areas box where residential densities and criteria would later be defined in the October 2015 GPA.
If those responsible for preparing the EC 9212 report referenced the outdated Figure LU-1 included in the now outdated Chapter 3 of the General Plan approved in December 2014, the statement "increase to 45 feet the maximum building height in the Neighborhoods" could be argued to be true because in December 2014, Figure LU-1 did not include the Neighborhoods special areas. As a result, for the window of time between December 4, 2014 and October 20, 2015, residential densities and criteria for neighborhoods is not defined in Figure LU-1 and the Neighborhoods special area did not exist.
+ CCSG Initiative, Policy LU-1 Community Form, see PDF p 5; and Figure LU-1 exactly as it was approved in the October 2015 GPA, see PDF p 6.
(Link: http://www.cupertino.org/inc/
+ Title and Summary for the CCSG Initiative as prepared by the City Attorney. The Title and Summary for the CCSG Initiative, which is intended to be the basis for the ballot question according to Elections Code 9051, includes no references to "establishing" or "increasing" building heights in neighborhoods.
(Link: http://www.cupertino.org/inc/
+ Elections Code 9051.
(Link: http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-
Relevant items as applied to the drafting of the ballot question for the CCSG Initiative include:
"(b) The ballot label shall not contain more than 75 words and shall be a condensed version of the ballot title and summary including the financial impact summary prepared pursuant to Section 9087 of this code and Section 88003 of the Government Code.
(c) In providing the ballot title and summary, the Attorney General 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."
No comments:
Post a Comment