Cupertino council signals support for parkland ballot measure, asks staff to fix zoning

The Cupertino City Council on March 3 gave staff direction to pursue development of a parkland ballot measure for the November 2026 ballot and to return with zoning corrections and a recommended consultant scope, though the council did not take a formal vote.

The measure stems from council direction following a January study session; city staff, led by Jonathan Orozco (acting director of administrative services), summarized mapping, zoning consistency, state-law protections and the logistical and fiscal steps required to place a measure on the ballot. Staff told the council county election costs are roughly $150,000 as a floor and that consultant and outreach work could raise the total to about $300,000 if polling and extensive outreach are included.

Why it matters: council members and speakers said the measure would create a local safeguard beyond state law to prevent conversion of parkland or facilities, and to resolve inconsistent land-use and zoning designations (for example, where park buildings are not included in parkland zoning). Several speakers urged including city facilities such as the Cupertino Sports Center and Blackberry Farm Golf Course in the measure’s definition; others opposed moving forward now because of cost and perceived lack of urgency.

Public comment was mixed. Jean Bedard, a Cupertino resident, urged council to vote no and said the measure would be “a waste of taxpayer money” and “would cost over $300,000 with no immediate benefit.” A planning commissioner speaking as a private citizen urged the council to expand the measure’s scope to explicitly protect recreational facilities and to require a two-thirds vote of both the council and voters for any transition of parkland. Jennifer Griffin and Peggy Griffin, speaking in favor, urged stronger protections and specific zoning cleanups for sites such as Creekside Park and Franco Park.

On timing and scope, Council members expressed differing views: one member said they supported the concept but not placing it on the November ballot due to budget and staff capacity; another said now is the time to act to avoid losing parkland and indicated support only if facilities are included. Council also directed staff to bring back zoning corrections to make land-use designations consistent across parks and park facilities.

Next steps: staff said it will return with a recommended consultant scope of work, a proposed budget appropriation, draft ballot language and outreach options, and will identify required council actions and checkpoints (staff flagged county deadlines in June–August for ballot submittal). No formal motion or vote to place a measure on the ballot was made at the special meeting.