Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the City Work Program topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council confirms two new strategic goals and finalizes 2‑year work program framework after contentious session
Summary
The Cupertino City Council confirmed two new strategic goals — environmental sustainability and fiscal strategy — and finalized a consolidated two‑year City Work Program framework for fiscal years 2025–27, directing staff to prioritize high‑risk capital and fee‑related work and to return detailed cost estimates as part of the budget process.
After a March workshop to prioritize projects, the Cupertino City Council confirmed two new council strategic goals — “Environmental Sustainability” and “Fiscal Strategy” — and finalized a consolidated two‑year City Work Program framework for 2025–27. The council adopted the new goals unanimously (council member Wong was absent from that procedural vote) and later debated a set of refinements and consolidations to the proposed project list before approving the amended consolidated list.
The council’s work program exercise began with each member submitting and ranking candidate projects; staff then consolidated those items, attached resource estimates and proposed timelines. Moss Adams’ policy inventory presentation and other departmental updates informed council discussion about risk and sequencing. Council direction emphasized a mix of near‑term items (year‑1 work) and longer‑term projects that will require multi‑year staffing or consultant support.
Key topics included: economic development and small business revitalization (consolidating several related items into a single economic development item, including outreach and permitting streamlining); a defensible impact fee nexus study (recommended to include traffic, retail, BMR and parkland impact fees and prioritized to begin in year 1); and capital improvement policy modernization (identified as a high‑risk administrative gap by auditors and prioritized for further work). The council also discussed but did not finalize some items, including options for Blackberry Farm uses and public engagement processes tied to planning issues.
Councilmembers repeatedly asked staff to sequence projects so the highest‑risk and highest‑impact items (including CIP policy updates and defensible fee studies) could be scheduled early in the two‑year period and to return refined cost and staffing estimates as part of the upcoming budget process. Several members said they want the Economic Development Committee (if reestablished) to undertake parts of the small business and retail revitalization effort. Staff noted the need to coordinate this program with the audit work plan, the CIP and the budget calendar.
The council asked staff to return at mid‑point for a one‑year check‑in on progress and to provide more detailed scoping and budget estimates for items expected to extend beyond the two‑year time frame.
