They say the CCC's proposed initiatives would:

* Frustrate future business development

* Hurt the city's General Fund

* Violate state housing laws

The initiatives by the grass-roots CCC proposed low-density growth by restricting building heights, density and setback and proposed that any changes to the General Plan be granted through a citywide vote. The grass-roots organization was also seeking a special citywide election on its initiatives in February 2005.

But in October a reluctant city council sought help by hiring economic and fiscal consultants to assess the initiatives' impact on the local economy, jobs, schools and housing.

And at its Nov. 1 meeting the city council and the CCC heard the results.

With one exception, the studies reflected concerns about the initiatives' effect on the city.

Jonathan Stern of Bay Area Economics, a firm specializing in real estate and economic analysis, said there would be a reduced incentive to build in Cupertino if the initiatives passed. The analysis showed that the initiatives' height limitations of 36 feet and density limitations of 45 feet would likely deter future business development. The loss of future business would also lead to lower revenues for Cupertino's General Fund.

Lee Rosenthal, a lawyer for Goldfarb and Lipman, raised legal concerns about the initiatives. Rosenthal said the CCC's proposed 15 dwelling units per acre could make it difficult to comply with state housing laws, particularly with regard to affordable housing. Under state law, Cupertino has an obligation to assume a share of the region's affordable-housing needs.

His results echoed a statement by Stern that "the initiatives would likely lead to higher-priced homes in Cupertino, since restrictions would limit affordable housing."

However, the reports found that the CCC initiatives would not have a significant impact on the city's two school districts. The Bay Area Economics group reported that "the initiatives would not pose a capacity concern overall to the Cupertino Union School District, although individual schools might be more affected. The Fremont Union School District is also expected to soon experience a space shortage, regardless of housing density."

Although the consultants stressed their nonpartisan position, the CCC maintained they were biased.

"The data used [by consultants] was supplied by city staff and developers," CCC's Bob Mckibbin said at the meeting.

In a written report to city hall, however, Bay Area Economics outlined its efforts to obtain objective results. For example, the group compared the proposed initiatives with regulations in neighboring communities such as San Jose and Santa Clara. Each city allowed for higher-density development, which could potentially make them more attractive to business than Cupertino.

After hearing the reports, the council unanimously decided against holding a special election on the CCC initiatives, saying the initiatives could wait until the next municipal election in November of 2005. In particular, the council was concerned about the need for rushing a special election in February, which would cost an estimated $372,000.

"We've gone 50 years without initiatives. Why should we spend $300,000 to accelerate the election?" asked Lowenthal.

Councilman Patrick Kwok echoed his concern about voting too quickly.

"If we do it in haste, we might make a mistake," he said.

Mayor Sandra James said a special election would cut out many voters, since such elections are generally ignored by those not directly involved in the issues. "Why exclude these voters?" she asked, adding the special election would be fiscally irresponsible.

Finally, Kris Wang spoke of the need to embrace all of Cupertino.

"The community is not just residents," she said. "How are we going to pay for things without money from businesses? We need to try to balance everything."

CCC member Dennis Whittaker said later he was not surprised by the city council's decision to move a vote on the initiatives to next November. He said the findings presented to the city were part of the city's pattern of misinformation and "false findings and false facts."

CCC members are considering the possibility of legal action.