Cupertino investigation triggers removal of two councilmembers from their committees, referral of former mayor to the DA’s office

In the wake of an independent investigation into the conduct of the Cupertino City Council, two councilmembers have been removed from their committee assignments and the Santa Clara County District Attorney’s Office has been asked to look into the actions of former Mayor Darcy Paul.

The investigation — which included the review of more than 1,500 emails, and interviews with 16 former and current executive and management staff and several councilmembers — found “abusive and controlling behavior” from Paul and noted that Councilmembers Liang Chao and Kitty Moore have been governing by sending “voluminous emails.”

The report from Santa Rosa-based employment attorney Linda Daube is the third of its kind in the last several years that points to governance issues and the poor treatment of city staff by councilmembers. One of the reports noted that such behavior increased the financial risk to the city.

The fallout has resulted in deep consequences for the city and its residents as employees leave in droves — 60% of senior management has left since January 2022 — and new developments and housing plans are delayed.

The city commissioned the investigation following the release of a Santa Clara County Civil Grand Jury report last December titled “A House Divided,” which looked into complaints about a potential adversarial relationship between the council and city officials.

Four interviewees told Daube the emails were often “threatening, accusatory, and somewhat coercive, leading staff to believe if they don’t appropriately respond, they will continue to be ‘badgered.'”

At a council meeting this past week, the council voted 3-0 to remove Chao and Moore from their committee assignments, and to ask the district attorney’s office to review Paul’s actions. He is accused of dictating hiring and firing decisions. The council is expected to return in the fall with a progress report and decide then whether to censure Chao and Moore for their actions.

Moore opted to recuse herself from the meeting even though City Attorney Chris Jensen said she didn’t need to and Chao, who showed up late due to work, left after asking several questions in which she cut off Daube multiple times as the investigator tried to answer her queries about whether the report took into account both sides.

In an email, Moore told the Mercury News she recused herself because the agenda mentioned a potential referral to the district attorney’s office, which could impact her finances. She called her removal from committee assignments “retaliatory,” and pointed to the investigation’s flaws.

“I am accountable for my actions, but not for tangential and anonymous interpretations of the questions I ask which are then used by my political opponents, who have taken on an adversarial stance pitting the city attorney against their council colleagues and harming the city,” she said.

In a separate email, Chao said she felt anything she would have said at the May 9 meeting would have been used against her. She thought the council would not be taking any action and said she would be willing to “participate later when the circumstances are appropriate and when more background information, such as actual evidence used to create the Daube report, is made available, following the due process.”

Chao, who was also highly critical of last year’s Santa Clara County Civil Grand Jury report, said a proper investigation would “consist of cross-examination of all witness testimonies in order to consider the context of any incident and the accuracy of the statements.”

Paul did not respond to a request for comment.

In an interview, Mayor Hung Wei said Moore and Chao walking out of the meeting was “disrespectful.”

“I am disappointed,” she said. “We were asked to work together, and how are we going to work together with two empty seats? They’re not even there to interact with us. To me, that is not facing reality.”

The issue of councilmembers not trusting staff has become a systemic problem in the city in recent years, with Wei saying she has seen the “deterioration” of the working relationship between the two parties since at least 2018.

Some political observers and housing advocates point toward Better Cupertino, a resident group that since 2014 has focused on what they call a balanced growth approach to the city and the regional housing crisis.

The group, of which Chao is a founder, has secured several seats on the council in recent years, electing former Mayor Steven Scharf in 2016, former Councilmember Jon Willey in 2018 and Moore in 2020.

Critics say Better Cupertino and its affiliated elected officials have been responsible for attempts to kill the city’s best chance at adding thousands of new homes in one project.

In 2018, Friends of Better Cupertino, the group’s nonprofit, filed a lawsuit against the city questioning the legality of fast-tracking the redevelopment of the former Vallco Shopping Mall under a controversial state law.

The project, which had already faced scrutiny from many of the same individuals in previous years, would bring 2,402 homes, 400,000 square feet of retail and 1.8 million square feet of office space to the city. The legal battle ended in 2020 with a judge saying it could proceed, but other delays have slowed it down.

Neil Park-McClintick, the executive director for the advocacy organization Cupertino For All, said the Better Cupertino councilmembers have created a “dynamic where nothing can get done.”

The last council, which was comprised of a majority of Better Cupertino-backed councilmembers, oversaw the process of planning how the city would meet its state-mandated housing goals for the next eight years. A draft of the plan was submitted at the last minute and was criticized by housing advocates for being vague and having words struck out in red with notes about what to add later on.

On May 4, the California Department of Housing and Community Development sent the city a 16-page letter with numerous corrections it will need to make in order to be in compliance.

In the meantime, advocates like Park-McClintick worry about the reputation the city has earned — especially among developers.

“It’s going to take years for us to really improve our reputation and rebuild relationships within the community and also outside of the community as well because of their actions,” he said. “The amount of damage they were able to do in just a few years is pretty incredible.”