Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> I was part of those meetings. Not a single thing the residents asked for was offered in their plans.

Because Better Cupertino refused to work with the developer in any way. It is impossible to negotiate with a group that is operating in bad faith; conspiracy theories and accusations of "corruption" are a hallmark of bad faith debate. The goal was simply a wish to prevent any housing whatsoever from being developed. There is inconsistency in your very post about whether you want affordable housing (which you have not proposed a funding mechanism for) or retail on the site. Steven Scharf made his intentions very clear when he made a disgusting joke about building a wall around Cupertino and making San Jose pay for it.

There isn't anything more I can say on the topic of Vallco that hasn't been already written by others. Suffice it to say that that the NIMBYism of exclusive suburbs like Cupertino is not a good look to ordinary Californians, which is why SB 50 for example polls so overwhelmingly well.



I'm the least NIMBY person you will find. I think they should build 30 story towers of housing on that property and make 1/2 of it affordable.

I'm not at all against housing on that site. I think it's critical that we put housing there.

I'm against that developer putting offices on the site that would create a housing deficit.

> There is inconsistency in your very post about whether you want affordable housing (which you have not proposed a funding mechanism for) or retail on the site

I proposed a tax on the retail to fund the affordable housing.

> which is why SB 50 for example polls so overwhelmingly well.

I'm a huge supporter of SB 50.




Consider applying for YC's Winter 2026 batch! Applications are open till Nov 10

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: