In this post we cover two topics: 1. Valley Church of Cupertino land being included in the Housing Element Site without informing them 2. Rod Sinks’ campaign misleading residents about retail at Westport
Valley Church: Designated Housing Element Site Without their Permission
A resident made us aware of a situation where four parcels of land owned by the Valley Church of Cupertino were put on the Housing Element Priority Site List, without ever consulting the Church!
The church had to write to the city to ensure that their lands, which were being used to provide community resources like tennis courts, were not converted for private profit.
This is illustrative of the lack of transparency and notifications about the change in zoning proposed in the housing element development process carried out by the Builder’s Controlled council since the November 2022 election. Any open space in Cupertino was at the risk of being rezoned for builders to profit from.
Residents of Linda Vista drive have expressed similar concerns of the rezoning of Evulich Ct. site from R1 (1-5 units/acre) to R3 (20-35 units/acre), where they did not receive any notifications. In the case of the Valley Church, even the property owner was not notified or consulted about the city’s plan to add their land to the Housing Element
Rod Sinks’ Campaign: Misinformation About Westport
Rod Sinks’ campaign sent out text messages and email claiming that the Westport development (Oaks Redevelopment) only provides homes, but not retail. He is also claiming he can negotiate a better deal. As usual with the politicians aligned with builders, the facts do not justify the claims.
20,000 sq ft of Retail Space at Westport
The Westport development has approval for 20,000 sq ft of commercial retail space, 37,601 square feet of common open space and 2,400 square feet of common retail outdoor space. For context, a typical Starbucks store is between 1500-2000 sq. ft. So the Westport development has plans for about a dozen stores of the size of the typical Starbucks.
Westport has a combination of owner occupied townhomes, senior housing, and assisted care facilities, and the retail spaces will open as different segments are built and occupied.
And it is important to remember that the original plan for Westport was based around giant towers with more than 800K sq ft of buildout with bulk of it as office space which would have significantly worsened the traffic at the Stevens Creek/Hwy 85/Hwy 280 junction (see picture below)
The plan being built is traffic neutral with the previous Oaks Plaza, provides valuable senior housing which our aging population needs, and helps address the housing shortage by providing more choices at a price point lower than single family homes..
Rods Record of Negotiation
Rod Sinks has a record of conceding every demand of developers, especially Sandhill Properties, in spite of massive protests by residents impacted by them. Most residents in neighborhoods near Vallco have a deep mistrust of Rod Sinks based on their bitter experiences lasting almost a decade.
Any successful negotiation and agreement, requires an element of trust between the parties involved. Rod simply lacks the trust of the residents most impacted by future development at Vallco, and his claims of being able to negotiate are specious at best.
One big part of the disinformation network run by the Builder-Politician complex is to stifle voices which provide an alternative perspective. They achieve that by removing content or banning users who disagree with their narrative on Nextdoor, a social media network for neighbors..
In the lead-up to the election, the following people have had their content removed or their accounts suspended.
1. Steven Scharf: Former Mayor of Cupertino 2. Muni Madhdhipatla: Planning Commissioner & former Vice Chair 3. Vikram Saxena: Former Vice Chair of Planning Commission 4. Rhoda Fry: 2022 Crest Award Winner for Public Safety 5. Seema Swamy: Parks & Recreation Commissioner 6. San R: Safe Route to Schools.
7. James Murasighe: Nextdoor Lead for Inspiration Heights
All of the people whose voices were stifled, support resident focused candidates, Ray Wang and Kitty Moore for the City Council, and Long Jiao for CUSD.
We include some of the posts which were deleted; these posts attempt to reproduce the deleted post since the authors can not access them any more. These posts reflect the authors personal opinions and not as of any city official
Ray Wang and Kitty Moore: Will take Vallco Forward
Rod Sinks is highlighting his negotiating skills and saying he will make Vallco happen.
What he does not realize is that most residents in the neighborhoods around Vallco, do not trust Rod Sinks at all. This is the result of the favors he has granted to Sandhill over the past 12 years. In fact, any agreement with his fingerprints, will automatically be suspect for a large section of the population in Cupertino.
For those who are truly interested in the redevelopment of Vallco, Ray Wang & Kitty Moore offer a fresh start. They do not bring in the baggage of the past decade which Rod Sinks, Gilbert Wong and Barry Chang bring with them; plus their resident focus approach will help create more trust in the agreement.
History of Builders’ Bullying in Cupertino
Builders Cupertino bullying is at a different level: they bully the entire city
• Using the City Manager to pressure Sears to sell to Peter Pau of Sandhill (2014) • Amend City’s General Plan to add 2M office space since Peter Pau asked for it (2014) • Removing all height limits at Vallco (2014) • Putting residents at risk of cancer by not revealing the toxic contamination and Cortese List listing of the Sears site (2016) • Not putting back height limits at Vallco when SB35 was about to become law (2017) • Forcing the City Attorney out when he did not agree to SB35 approval (2018) • Closing three schools in the middle of a 100 year pandemic when CUSD was projecting its highest ever surplus (2021) • Harassing city councilors and commissioners who were not aligned with their agenda (eg: Grand Jury which was tossed out by the DA) (2023) • Fighting City’s lobbying registration requirements with a lawsuit, and after losing it amending them to not have builder’s lobbyists to register (2022-2023) • Trying to upzone 1600 single family R1 lots to R3-condos to enable 5-story buildings towering over our single family homes. (2023) • Sending each household a hidden tax of $3500 by agreeing to waive $77M in development fees for Vallco
You can build without destroying what already exists.
Pro-Residents is NOT Anti Development
There is a canard spread in Cupertino, that people who want the city council to consider the interests of residents are anti-development. The term anti-development is often used by groups backed by big-real estate to stifle discussion about sustainable development.
A well-functioning city-council will balance the concerns of the residents with the developers’ right to develop their property and earn economic benefit. The developers try to maximize the square footage of what they build, but have little interest in how it impacts the people around their development.
Until the November 2018 election, the Cupertino City Council was in control of politicians who are quite close to developers. KT Urban, which was driving the redevelopment of the Oaks Plaza, a project called Westport, wanted to build more than 800K sq ft of offices. They tried to get the office allocation but were asked to wait. The City’s politicians were focussed on enabling the Vallco project and had already given almost all the allocation added to the General Plan (2 Million sq ft) to Vallco.
Cupertino does not get mass transit like BART, Caltrain, Muni or Light Rail. Being a transit desert means that any new office space will lead to a direct increase in vehicular traffic which will make our commute time traffic jams even worse.
After the resident-focussed City Council took over, KT Urban realized that getting the office allocation was even less likely than before because there was resident opposition to it. They decided to pivot the project to housing.
The Westport being built, was negotiated by the pro-resident council. It consists of townhomes, senior housing, an assisted living facility and retail. It is traffic neutra and provides much needed senior housing in Cupertino, and along with a bike path.
The transformation of Westport from giant office towers to much needed housing is a great example of how a resident focussed city council can enable development in Cupertino in a manner which is sustainable
Unlike what the developers want us to believe, pro-residents means sensible development; it does not mean anti-development.
Giant office towers which would have worsened the traffic situation on the Stevens Creek and Hwy 85 junction
In this post we cover another form of disinformation used by the builder-politician complex: claiming credit for accomplishments they had little part to play in. We have two write-ups to share from community members on debunking claims made by Rod Sinks in his election website.
Rod Sinks Claims Credit for SV Hopper
Refuted by ex-Mayor Darcy Paul
“The Silicon Valley Hopper started as Cupertino’s Via Shuttle when our Mayor was Steven Scharf. It’s strange how some people like to label us the so-called ‘Better Cupertino’ City Council, and then take all the credit for things that we did while blaming us for various things that we didn’t do.
I was the Mayor when Via Shuttle was being voted on by the City of Santa Clara to expand to their city as well. At the same time, I was the board member for VTA representing the West Valley cities. There are twelve members of the VTA board, and the West Valley seat has five cities.
Well, as you would expect, VTA does not automatically support competitors to its services. However, the expansion of Via Shuttle to become the Silicon Valley Hopper did gain that support when I was on the VTA board of directors, and this happened in 2022, when I was Mayor.
As to the City of Santa Clara, I reached out both to their Mayor, Lisa Gilmor, as well as to her colleague Councilmember Raj Chahal to help secure their city’s unanimous support. And so, regardless of who else tries to take credit or blame us for this or that, the fact of the matter is that we did significant amounts of work on making this transit option available for the residents of Cupertino.”
Former Mayor Darcy Paul, City of Cupertino
Rod Sinks Embellishes His Role in Reducing Pollution from the Lehigh Plant
We are publishing a detailed rebuttal from Rhoda Fry. In 2022 she was honored by a CREST award for Public Safety for her work to change the time for garbage pickups so as not to interfere with children going to school and for providing the City with an analysis of the quarry use-permits to put an end to illegal truck traffic between the two quarries
Rhoda Fry moved to Cupertino in 1983 after graduating from CMU to work at Tandem Computers. She became active in City affairs when she discovered that the City was about to enact an emergency illegal tax. She fought and won. Since then, she has been involved in issues related to the environment (especially Lehigh-documents from last century), public safety or fiscal accountability. This year, her efforts contributed to a new County ordinance that protects ground-water quality from the ravages of mining. She also discovered that the City had misused funds that were intended for below market rate housing.
Rod Sinks Misled Public about Lehigh- by Rhoda Fry
As many people know, I have worked on Lehigh issues for over fifteen years and was alarmed by statements made by Rod Sinks who incorrectly claimed to have reduced air pollution at Lehigh while sitting on the Bay Area Air Quality Management Board (BAAQMD). At the Diya TV candidate forum, he stated “I helped secure a deal with the Lehigh cement plant to drastically improve our air quality.”
In 2019, a new air-pollution rule was proposed as part of a consent decree involving many states to address a 2010 EPA violation that would be implemented in 2021. In 2019, there were multiple industrial incidents at the cement plant and BAAQMD did little for us residents. In 2020, Lehigh shut its cement plant down when it became clear that the County would not allow an expansion of its limestone mining operations referred by County Supervisor Joe Simitian as “don’t chop the top.”
Consequently, the new air-pollution rule was never implemented. It would not have mattered because the new rule did little to protect us residents. Residents wrote letters (Consent Decree Public Comments) begging for a better rule but were not heard. Gary Latshaw, Chair of the Bay Area for Clean Environment Group wrote,
“We do not find that the consent decree provides adequate protection for the air quality in the region. Notwithstanding the potential of the “test and set” methodology for SOx, the specified required regulations for NOx and SOx are only marginal improvements over existing conditions. Even under optimistic assumptions, the emissions would still degrade the health and longevity of Bay Area residents.”
For example, while the maximum allowable sulfur pollution was 0.2 lbs/ton at other Lehigh cement plants, the Cupertino facility’s maximum allowable sulfur pollution was ten times more at 2.1 lbs/ton! And the so-called new sulfur limits in Cupertino represented a mere 3% reduction of only 0.07 lbs (from 2.17 lbs/ton to 2.1)!!!
Rod Sinks claiming any credit for negotiating a deal or reducing air pollution is usurpation of credit due to local volunteers who tirelessly worked to save our environment from excessive pollution by Lehigh for many decades.
Lehigh History: At the end of Stevens Creek Blvd, is a massive quarry and industrial site on over 3500 acres that spans three jurisdictions, Cupertino, Unincorporated Santa Clara County, and Palo Alto. The quarry has mined for limestone that is very high in naturally-occurring contaminants, such as mercury and selenium.
Until 2011, usable waste-rock was crushed into aggregate and sold. That operation was re-built a decade later and presently is the only commercial activity at the site. The rest of the waste-rock is spread over 200 acres of thinly vegetated moonscape.
The limestone is the main ingredient to make cement in a giant kiln fueled by petroleum coke, a filthy polluting fuel that is a by-product of oil refineries. Among California’s industrial air polluters, Lehigh ranked #2 for Sulfur, #3 for Hydrochloric Acid, #4 for PM 2.5, #6 for VOCs, #7 for Nitrogen, and #10 for Hexavalent Chromium.
With the revelation that the County would not allow Lehigh to access anymore limestone, the cement plant closed permanently in 2020. There have been hundreds of environmental and labor-safety violations at the site from both the mining operations and quarrying, some of which remain unresolved.
Political Connections:
Over the years, Lehigh has been protected by the San Jose and Cupertino Chambers of Commerce and numerous politicians. Among others, the following politicians have been employed by the quarry and cement plant: County Supervisor Tom Legan; Cupertino Council member, BAAQMD representative and aspiring County Supervisor Barbara Koppel; Cupertino council member Sandy James; and Assemblymember Jim Cuneen.
Many council members would not respond to resident concerns and were reluctant to even send a letter to the County. Gilbert Wong was one of those reluctant council members. Barry Chang became a Lehigh activist but lost credibility when he became overly vocal and has not been active on Lehigh issues since 2018. Strangely, current council member J. R. Fruen ran a PAC in 2018 with primary funding from Vallco which paid $10K to Ed McGovern, a Lehigh Lobbyist.
Lehigh Future:
Moving forward, Lehigh needs to shore up the over-mined crumbling ridgeline between the quarry and Rancho San Antonio by filling the quarry. The approved 2012 plan uses onsite mining-waste to shore up our scenic ridgeline however their new proposal turns the quarry into a for-profit landfill, importing soil from construction sites at a rate of 600 trucks per day for 30 years. We need a City Council who really works for residents first to prevent this unnecessary traffic. We need to regain a resident-friendly council majority by re-electing Kitty Moore and electing Ray Wang.
A video explaining what led to builders targeting Ray Wang
A followup on the Rod Sinks-Andi Jordan Harassment Case
A video response to malicious attack on Ray Wang
We made a video highlighting why Ray Wang is being attacked. Please watch it below
More Instances of Questionable Behavior by Rod Sinks
n an earlier article we had covered how a local publication Cupertino Matters, grossly misrepresented facts to hide Rod Sinks central in Andi Jordan harassment settlement. Rod denied Andi health insurance because her husband had it which is illegal discrimination based on gender and marital status; Cupertino Matters did not even mention Rod Sinks name even once in two articles.
A reader pointed out this in not new.
Rod Sinks Hated him (Randy) because he is Chinese
In 2018, the builder’s proxies running Cupertino City Council decided to fire the City Attorney Randy Hom because “he voiced his opposition to the city’s illegal and unethical conduct”. In his tort claim against the City Randy Hom stated that Barry Chang told him that:
“Rod Sinks hated him because he is Chinese. Mr. Sinks hates the Chinese and never wanted him in the City Attorney position in the first place”– Barry Chang
The city settled Randy Hom’s tort claim after spending more than $400K.
In this post, we want to cover yet another instance of disinformation carried out by Jean Bedord’s Cupertino Matters, this time to cover-up Rod Sinks’ misogyny.
In 2022, Andi Jordan, Executive Director of the Cities Association of Santa Clara County, threatened to sue the Association because of discrimination & harassment. One of the core pillars of her complaint was illegal discrimination based on gender and marital status, both protected categories, in the 2019 refusal of health insurance benefits by the executive committee.
A married woman "did not need benefits because her husband had them" - Rod Sinks
Andi further claimed, that even after her husband lost his job in December 2020, the Association refused to offer her health insurance!
However, the coverage of this issue, by Jean Bedord’s local publication Cupertino Matters, raises serious questions about journalistic integrity and the deliberate misrepresentation of facts.
Rod Sinks becomes Invisible
Cupertino Matters covered the topic in two articles: the April 5, 2022 issue and the July 26, 2022 issue. Neither of the two articles madeany reference to Rod Sinksor his illegal sexist and misogynist behavior. Instead, their reporting places an undue emphasis on the involvement of Councilmember Liang Chao, who joined the Association much later, after Rod Sinks termed out in Q4 2020.
Further the articles blame Liang Chao for the city’s share of $8030 in the settlement involving 15 cities. This skewed focus not only misrepresents the core issues at stake but also misleads readers about the true nature and timeline of the controversy.
Liang Chao’s Actual Involvement
The facts paint a very different picture of Liang Chao’s role. Chao joined the Cities Association after Rod Sinks had termed out, well after the discriminatory events of 2019. Her participation was limited to attending quarterly board meetings; she had no role in determining Andi Jordan’s compensation, and was not part of the executive committee. During one of the board meetings in August 2021, Liang Chao asked for some details about the case, which could have been misconstrued as an illegal request since harassment cases are protected.
Regarding the August 2021 board meeting incident, Chao provided the following statement:
“That was at an open board meeting, when I had no idea Andi Jordan was even under investigation. It was all confidential, including who filed the harassment complaint. I thought it was a consultant’s attorney that filed a complaint. So, as I remember, I asked about something and they said it cannot be discussed but I had no idea why. I would have to have the prior knowledge that Andi had filed a harassment complaint in order to know it was unlawful to discuss. But since I had no knowledge about the complaint, I had no idea that it could be unlawful”
Media Responsibility and Bias
The stark contrast between Cupertino Matters’ extensive focus on Chao’s minor, unintentional action in 2021 and its complete silence on Sinks’ central role in the 2019 discrimination case is deeply troubling. This imbalance, maintained across two separate articles, raises serious questions about the publication’s motives and journalistic integrity.
Exposing the Misdirection
Cupertino Matters’ coverage completely ignores Rod Sinks’ sexism and misogyny while unfairly implicating Liang Chao. This misdirection is especially egregious considering that Chao had no involvement in Andi Jordan’s compensation decisions and was not even part of the Association when the discriminatory events took place. The publication’s failure to address the core issue of gender-based discrimination in health-benefits that occurred in 2019 is a serious dereliction of journalistic duty. Instead, it has chosen to focus on a peripheral issue from 2021, misleading the public about the true nature, timeline, and seriousness of the situation. And of course Rod Sinks name is not brought up even once even though the denial of health insurance because Andi was married was a clear violation of the law, and the foundation for Andi’s complaint.
Cupertino Seniors’:Victims of Disinformation
Many of the recipients of Jean’s newsletter are retired long-time Cupertino residents, who are committed to doing the right thing for our community. Their understanding of local issues is shaped by Jean’s regular updates. However, in an effort to serve the interests of builders, Jean deliberately misleads them. In this case, she placed the blame for the $8,030 fine the city incurred on Liang Chao, despite the fact that the root cause of the entire situation was Rod Sinks’ refusal to provide medical insurance to a married woman. It’s particularly disheartening that Jean, as a woman, understands the struggle for fair treatment in the workplace but still chooses to cover for Rod Sinks while scapegoating another woman, Liang Chao.
Bloomberg, CNBC, FoxBusiness, and many other leading media orgs have Ray Wang as a guest a few times a week. All of them do background checks to not bring people with dubious history on their panels.
Redwood City Council Person Endorses Ray’s Commitment to Residents
The video below is from a two times Redwood City Council Women Colleen Hallinan, acknowledging how Ray worked so hard to defend residents from harm due to greedy builders and resisted harassment from builders, about 20 years ago.
Disinformation Attacks: History & Motivations
After JR Fruen led builders-YIMBY took over the City Council they decided to take control of the Planning Commission. As part of the process to remove Ray Wang from the planning commission, they orchestrated a disinformation campaign about an incident in Redwood City/Shores two decades ago.
They are rehashing some of the articles they published in local outlets to denigrate Ray. Please do not fall for the disinformation. These attacks are malacious and without substance, and are being distributed because the builders are afraid Ray will resist their efforts to make Billions in profits on the back of our quality of life.
What happened in Redwood City Two Decades Ago?
In 2003, Ray challenged Redwood City’s decision to grant permission to a builder to use recycled, non-potable water in areas accessible to children, who may not realize that it’s not fit for drinking. Not being able to dump that non-potable water would have increased the costs and reduced profits for builders.
One local politician, Rosanne Foust, was leveraged by the builders to sue Ray Wang. Foust has a close relationship with developers and was fined $3000 by the FPPC in 2014 for the misuse of her position as the Vice-Mayor to champion another big project.
Ray, whose wife was pregnant with their first child at that time, decided to settle instead of going through a jury trial. He pleaded no-contest to charges of leaving an annoying message for Foust on her phone.
Related charges accusing him of sexual harassment were summarily dismissed. Ray has stated that he had an open wifi network (these were early days of wireless internet) and a builder’s agent may have connected to it to sign-up Foust’s email for web-sites which may deliver adult content, in order to frame him.
Please Defend Your Rights from Builders
After Ray was removed from the Planning Commission, the builders took control and stopped having meetings, Out of the regularly scheduled 24 meetings, only six were held in 2023.
This limited transparency and opportunity for public input, while the city’s Housing Element was being redone to favor builders. That allowed the builders to hide their shenanigans like the proposal to upzone all corner lots in single family homes to R3 to allow construction of five story condos in single family neighborhoods. Strategy HE-1.3.6 of the 2nd HE draft
Earlier this evening, the coterie of ex-mayors resurfaced and sent out an email message spreading disinformation about how and why the Housing Element was delayed leading to Builder’s Remedy.
Stealing Design & Claiming Copyright
In their message, they included a picture taken from the “Save Our Neighborhoods” sign which some residents developed to highlight the risk of high density construction in single family lots. They not only did not give credit to the person who had created the sign, they even claimed copyright to it! Further while the signs were meant to support Kitty Moore and Ray Wang, the deceiving mayors used them to support their opponents.
We are including a video from the resident who created this sign, who shares his outrage at the theft of his intellectual property, and the unethical attempts by the ex-mayors to deceive Cupertino Residents.
The residents demand an immediate retraction from Richard Lowenthal, Dolly Sandoval, Kris Wang, JR Fruen, Hung Wei, and Sheila Mohan for stealing our intellectual property and attempting to falsely copyright it. This is emblematic of your unethical leadership and it is unacceptable .
Screenshot from email sent by the three ex-mayors
Disinformation Barrage Continues
A lot has already been written about how the builder’s took over the city council via their YIMBY proxy JR Fruen & Sheila Mohan) in November 2022.
Instead of adopting the existing Housing Element draft and submitting it for approval, they waited till after the deadline to even submit it. While evaluating that submission, HCD declared that it “addresses most statutory requirements. For context, Palo-Alto’s draft was judged to “address many statutory requirements”, a lower level of compliance.
HCD also noted that many YIMBY orgs including JR Fruen’s Cupertino For All shared comments about why the draft required revisions. Thereafter they delayed the housing element by 18 months exposing the city to Builder’s Remedy. In their legal settlement with JR’s buddies in other YIMBY orgs in early 2024 the City invited Builder’s Remedy projects. All Active Builder Remedy projects were filed after that settlement.
Please do not let these unethical people succeed in deceiving you.
In this post we focus on how the Builder-Political Complex uses a sophisticated disinformation network to achieve its goals. The disinformation network has been extremely successful in misleading the residents. Three years ago when CUSD shut down multiple school campuses, most residents believed it was because of a budget shortfall due to falling enrollment. The reality was that CUSD was projecting almost $39.5M of surplus over the next five years. The video by CUSD Trustee Jerry Liu sheds light on it
The modus-operandi of such campaigns is to get articles & editorials published in regional news outlets which support policies sponsored by builders, without providing the readers with a comprehensive or objective view. For example, articles were written blaming falling school enrollment to justify the need for a lot more new housing in Cupertino. However they failed to mention that prior to the drop the enrollment had increased every year for almost 15 years. Or that even after the drop CUSD schools were running way above planned capacity with almost 25% of classes in portable classrooms. Or that the year after the decision to close the schools to save $1.5M, CUSD was projecting the biggest surplus ever in its history, $16M in the next year.
In this article we will focus on the disinformation campaigns organized by JR Fruen’s Cupertino For All, especially those run by its Information Officer, Jean Bedord.
Disinformation: East Cupertino vs West Cupertino
One method employed by the builder’s lobby is to project residents’ concerns of builders’ influence over city council as a conflict between the East and West side of Cupertino. The controversial Sand Hill Properties proposals to redevelop the Vallco Mall disproportionately impact the residents of East Cupertino. It is reasonable that the residents of the neighborhoods around Vallco will be vocal in challenging the resident unfriendly behavior of the council.
However, campaigns are run by the builder’s lobby to frame that community leaders from the East side want to harm the West side, and hence the residents should vote for the builders’ candidates
The reality, however, is the opposite as residents of Linda Vista Drive are now realizing.
Recent Nextdoor Interaction
We wanted to highlight a recent Nextdoor conversation illustrating how Jean makes misleading statements to create confusion in the mind of fellow residents. Jean comments on a post saying:
“Kitty Moore and Ray Wang voted to bring high density housing to Western Half of the City, ignoring the Topography”
Fact Check: Statement is False
In 2019, the resident focused city council voted against development on the Vista Heights property. (details here)
On the contrary, Jean Bedord, spoke in favor of the project on the top of the cliff moving forward (video below), during the 2019 City Council Meeting, “ignoring the topography”
Kitty Moore voted NO, to the July 2024 Housing Element approval which legally up-zoned the Evulich Court site to R3.
The residents focussed council reduced the density for Westport (Oak’s Redevelopment) to just 30% of the original proposal and also put to end conversations of rezoning the Blackberry Farm Golf Course as a residential housing site.
West Cupertino Faces YIMBY Assault
The residents of Linda Vista Drive on West Cupertino are dealing with the impact of the decisions taken by the JR Fruen led council since November 2022 which has led to two new developments which will double the number of homes on their street.
One project on Evulich Ct is the result of rezoning of a series of R1 (single family) parcels to R3/TH (multifamily townhomes) which was approved in July 2024 as part of the Housing Element
The second project is a Builder’s Remedy project near Linda Vista Park, which is proposing an even more dense development than the earlier proposal rejected by the resident-focussed city council during November 5, 2019 meeting.
The city is forced to accept Builder’s Remedy projects because JR Fruen led council decided to completely redo the city’s housing element plan finalized in October 2022, and also agreed to accept Builder’s Remedy projects as part of a settlement of a lawsuit filed by YIMBY organizations.
An element of Jean’s style is to provide a lot of information, with omissions and misrepresentations, to mislead her readers. Since she is perceived as the local expert, people trust her words. Her recent September 10 newsletter highlights that.
In that post, Jean gives a timeline of the housing element but conveniently forgets to mention key details, the role played by YIMBY orgs like Cupertino For All, or highlights information which is irrelevant to the progress of the housing element
In the next section we are including the timeline she published in italics, interleaved with additional context being provided in regular font inblue. Some of Jean’s content is highlighted in RED to represent how Jean highlighted it.
Context
ABAG adopted the RHNA Allocations for the 2023-2032 planning cycle on Decemeber 16, 2021, asking Cupertino to have a plan to construct 4588 new homes. The city starts process in Q1-2022 with the first draft discussed with the city council in August 2022.
In August 2022, JR Fruen, writing as the Policy Officer of Cupertino For All, lists out demands from YIMBY groups, as the city is reviewing the Housing Element Draft demanding more buffer, more upzoning and not to count pipeline projects.
>Oct. 22, 2022, First Draft provided for Public Review After the approval of the HE sites in August, the City published the first draft
>Dec. 10, 2022: new councilmembers Sheila Mohan and JR Fruen sworn in, and Hung Hei(sic) chosen as mayor. As customary, city offices were closed between Christmas and New Year’s.
After JR Fruen’s election, Cupertino For All, wrote to the City Council again, demanding major changes and a redo of the Housing Element. The letter is endorsed by Jean Bedord, Connie Cunningham and Louise Saadati. This letter is in the records for the Dec 10 meeting.
>Feb 3, 2023: First Draft submitted to HCD as a placeholder to show progress.
The City waited more than three months after the 1st draft was available (October 22, 2022) to send the draft to HCD on February 3, 2022, missing the approval deadline by three days
>May 4, 2023: within the full 90 days allowed for review, HCD provided 14 pages of comment requiring the city to basically redo the First Draft.
The May 4, letter by the HCD reviewing the first draft: stated that the draft submitted by the city addresses most statutory requirements! It also states that several YIMBY organizations, including JR Fruen & Jean Bedord’s Cupertino For All, had written to demand changes in the Housing Element.
For context, the Housing Element draft submitted by Palo Alto in December 2022, was only found to address many statutory requirements, a lower level of compliance than Cupertino’s .
It should be evident that there was NO justification to completely redo the draft as claimed by Jean. The draft was deemed as mostly compliant and some edits would have fixed it. The changes made in the subsequent drafts were made to transform it to what was demanded by YIMBYs which JR Fruen had listed in his August 2022 letter
>July 25, 2023: Council Study Session on the 6th Cycle Housing Element Update Council approved direction to staff to develop a Housing Element with additional sites and policies per HCD direction on a vote of 4-0-1 with Moore (inexplicably) abstaining.
The new housing element draft was submitted about a year after the first draft, This draft proposed that ALL Single Family Home Lots (R1) at corner lots or near mixed used areas, should be rezoned to R3 (Condos). During 2023, when the new draft was being prepared 18 out of 24 Planning Commission meetings were cancelled.
>Oct. 6, 2023: the Second Draft was submitted for public review under the guidance of a experienced replacement consultant
Note, that 2nd draft (October 2023) took almost a year to develop after the first draft (October 2022). But Jean blames the resident friendly council for the delay in the initial draft which was published within 10 months of the RHNA allocation being finalized in December 2021.
>Oct. 16,2023: the Second Draft was submitted to HCD, then revised on Oct. 30
The HCD downgraded Cupertino’s compliance with the law after reviewing the 2nd draft. It said the draft “addresses many statutory requirements”. This was less compliant than the first draft which was deemed to have “addresses most statutory requirements”. Cupertino perhaps is the only city whose second submission was judged to be less compliant than the first submission.
>Dec. 15, 2023: HCD provided 6 pages of comments for revision. (Just in time for holiday shutdown)
On January 1, 2024, the city settled a lawsuit filed by JR Fruen’s YIMBY buddies. In the agreement the city stated that it is open to accept Builder’s Remedy Projects. All active Builder’s Remedy Projects were filed after the settlement of the YIMBY lawsuit in 2024. Jean chose to omit that.
>Feb. 16, 2024: Third Draft submitted for Public Comment >Feb. 27, 2024: Third Draft submitted to HCD, then revised in March. >March 28, 2024: Final Third Draft submitted to HCD >April 10, 2024: HCD conditionally accepts the Third Draft, pending zoning revisions to ensure >May 14, 2024: Council adopted the Third Draft of the Housing Element on, on a 3-2 vote with Councilmembers Kitty Moore voting NO and Liang Chao abstaining. >July 16, 2024, associated zoning changes were approved by council on a 4-1 vote with Councilmember Kitty Moore voting NO.
This was the day the rezoning of sites like Evulich Ct. were approved. Kitty Moore opposed the motion and voted NO. This adopted Housing Element required the city to plan for 1800 more homes than the 1st draft, leading to widespread upzoning across Cupertino.
>Sept. 4, 2024 HCD officially certified the Housing Element, ending new Builder’s Remedy projects.
Jean’s description of the process, has zero references to the letters and actions taken by Cupertino For All (Demanding changes in August 2022, Asking for a redo in December 2022, writing to HCD to oppose the 1st draft, Q1-2023). She also fails to mention the attempt to upzone single family lots to condos (R3)
Do note that Jean highlights that Kitty Moore voted NO to motions when the draft was being redone to meet YIMBY’s demands. She is perhaps attempting to create the impression, that her NO votes led to the delay. The reality is that after November 2022 elections, the builders had control of the council (JR Fruen, Hung Wei, Sheila Mohan) and all the motions Kitty voted NO on, passed.
Kitty Moore’s NO votes were an expression of her disagreement of the process and the outcome; they did not hinder the progress of the HE in any way.
Chief Disinformation Office
We feel that instead of the title of Information Officer at Cupertino For All, the Builder-Politician Complex should recognize her impact and appoint her as their Chief Disinformation Officer.
Whether it is the facilitating the shutdown of schools while CUSD had a huge budget surplus, or the proliferation of Builder’s Remedy projects, Jean has succeeded in misleading a large segment of residents with her disinformation campaigns to drive the builder’s agenda of making billions on the back of our quality of life.
Over the years, there have been whisper campaigns on the mostly residential West side of Cupertino, suggesting the residents should support builder backed candidates for City Council. The reason given was that West Cupertino is already built out and will not be impacted by the denser developments desired by the builders, since it will be on the East side.
However, the reality is that once zoning laws are changed to allow higher density construction, they apply to the entire city, not just East Cupertino. West Cupertino, is dominated by single family homes, and is especially vulnerable to policies which allow existing single family lots to be rezoned to permit multi-story high-density construction
Linda Vista Drive Residents Wake Up to Plans for 87 New Homes
Linda Vista Drive is situated West of Bubb in North Monta Vista; it is in the subdivision which houses three schools: Lincoln Elementary, Kennedy Middle and Monta Vista High. It is a neighborhood of single family homes, zoned as R1.
There are two projects under consideration which are going to dramatically alter the neighborhood by almost doubling the number of homes on the street.
The first project is a plan to build more than 50 townhomes on a site originally zoned for 11 single family homes. With the relaxed guidelines for setbacks, building height and floor area, the builder plans to have multi-story buildings less than 7 ft from the adjoining single family homes. Note that R1 zoning requires a 2nd story setback of at least 25f; and 40ft for larger lots.
The second project, Vista Heights, is a Builder’s Remedy project to convert an old quarry originally zoned for four homes with hillside zoning, to around 35 homes along with a commercial gymnasium. The entrance to the development will be via a steep road feeding into Linda Vista Park.
Former Mayors: Facilitating High Density Projects in West Side R1 Zones
We recently discovered an email sent by former City Mayor, Richard Lowenthal, to current city council members Hung Wei and Sheila Mohan. Leading up to the November 2022 elections, Richard Lowenthal ran a PAC from his home address, under the self-appointed moniker of “Council of Mayors”. This coterie of ex-mayors supported pro-builder candidates including the YIMBY JR Fruen and YIMBY endorsed Sheila Mohan. Two members of the coterie, Rod Sinks & Barry Chang are also running for the City Council, again in 2024
The email chain starts with Leon Chen, the builder who wants to develop Vista Heights, writing to Richard Lowenthal, with the subject line “help connect with majors (sic)”. In his email, Leon asks for an introduction to council members Hung Wei and Sheila Mohan about the Vista Heights project which he had discussed with Richard. Richard forwards that email to the council member, with a personal endorsement calling “He(Leon) and his wife as wonderful people”.
We do wonder why:
Leon Chen discussed the project with Richard Lowenthal who had not been on the city council for more than a decade
Leon Chen did not write directly to the City Council Members, but sought the introduction from the former mayor.
Leon Chen sought audience with only two of the five current members of the City Council
No Neighborhood is Safe from YIMBYs
It is not surprising that the people who won their elections, telling West Cupertino residents that they are protecting them for high density constructions, are facilitating higher density construction on Linda Vista Drive. They are beholden to the builders, not the residents of Cupertino.
State laws like SB10 facilitate higher density construction in single family zoned lots; all it needs is approval of the city council.
As part of the housing element, the YIMBY controlled Cupertino City Council also proposed making all corner lots in single family zoned areas to be rezoned to the R3, without any public input, allowing multi-family (apartment/condos) developments at every corner. They also wanted to make any single family lot near a big street to be eligible to be converted into an apartment.
The final draft changed the rezoning from R3 (multi-family apartments/condos) to R2 (duplex). With ADU laws, a lot zoned for R2 can have two main homes and up to three additional Accessory Dwelling Unit per primary home. In the future, the city council can go back to the proposal of R3 density in R1 zones, as they had originally planned.
Save our Home Values: End Builders Control
The builders’ lobby control of Cupertino’s local governments institutions has resulted in major negative changes in our quality of life.
They were successful in closing down multiple schools in CUSD right in the middle of the pandemic, even though CUSD schools are very crowded, and the school district was projecting a surplus of $39M over the next five years, when the schools were closed. (Read CUSD: Dispelling Disinfo with Data)
Going forward, they want to allow construction of multi-story buildings right in the middle of single family neighborhoods, with very low setback requirements. These will make existing single family homes in Cupertino be less attractive to future buyers, since they run the risk of having a five story condominium towering over their backyard, less then six feet away from their property.
It’s time residents of both East and West Cupertino unite to end builders’ control of our local governments, and preserve the character of our single family neighborhoods.
In this post we want to shed light on how YIMBY groups are dictating Cupertino’s future.
YIMBY is an acronym for “Yes in My Back Yard”. It refers to groups who support in-fill redevelopment in urban areas. Over the past decade they have gained a lot of prominence, as they leverage the housing affordability concerns in California, to drive their political agenda.
But who are the YIMBY? And who sponsors them? Are they truly focused towards improving the affordability of housing and housing justice? Or are they simply interested in helping developers maximize their profits by building bigger in existing high cost housing areas?
Housing Justice Advocates Views on YIMBYs
Housing Is A Human Right, is a housing justice group which is focused on ensuring basic housing access for all. They studied how the CA politicians are impacting the housing situation. In 2022, they published a book titled Selling Off California: The Untold Story which uncovers what key politicians (eg: Senator Scott Weiner), YIBMYs, and Big Real Estate are achieving by their policies.
In the 1st Chapter, the author, Patrick Range McDonald, writes:
When I joined Housing Is A Human Right as an advocacy journalist, I wrote extensively about Big Real Estate, Wiener, and YIMBYs, who also advance the real estate industry’s scheme to make billions, probably trillions, at the expense of hard-working people.I’ve learned many things about them all. Things they don’t want you to know.
The Progressive Elements of the Democratic Party have also expressed concern. Dean Preston, a member of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors, and a member of the Democratic Socialist of America (DSA) stated an interview that:
The so-called YIMBY folks have redefined a “NIMBY” to be anyone that doesn’t just jump when the real estate industry says jump, and they’ve become a very toxic force. They have been attacking me for years, attacking pretty much anyone who demands things that actually help a community as part of development—either investments in transit or investments in affordable housing. They have evolved over the years into what is now just a complete disinformation campaign.
Cupertino For All: Cupertino’s Hometown YIMBY Org
Cupertino For All (C4A), is a YIMBY group incubated by current Cupertino City Council Member, JR Fruen. JR Fruen’s relationship with the Real Estate Lobby is well documented.
In 2018, he ran a PAC which received tens of thousands of dollars from real-estate interests to support City Council candidates aligned with real-estate interests. His 2020 and 2022 campaigns for city council also received similar support (Read More). He has also served as a lawyer for a YIMBY orgs.
Other leaders of Cupertino For All include Jean Bedord and Connie Cunningham who act as Information Officers advocating for high density developments across all of Cupertino with reduced parking requirements .
Cupertino Housing Element: JR Fruen’s Letter to City Council (August 2022)
As regular readers may be aware, Cupertino’s Housing Element (HE) was delayed by the City Council elected in November 2022, with the final plan approved in September 2024.
After multiple quarters of effort, the City Staff had developed a HE plan. The plan was discussed at multiple Planning Commission & City Council meetings in 2022, with draft being ready by October 2022. JR Fruen, representing himself as the Policy Director for Cupertino For All, wrote to the City Council demanding:
To not count pipeline projects towards meeting the housing unit requirements
To increase the buffer of additional housing from 17% in the city’s draft proposal
To increase the size of the homes allowed in different zones (without attention to aesthetics or impact on neighbors), upzoning to increase the number of homes allowed, and eliminating parking requirements.
Council Behavior after Nov 2022 Elections
JR Fruen was elected to the Cupertino City Council in the Nov 2022 election, along with Sheila Mohan, replacing the incumbent Darcy Paul (term out) and John Willey (did not run).
For the December 20, 2022 City Council meeting, Cupertino For All submitted multiple communications (same form letter) expressing concern with Cupertino’s HE Plan draft (link here). The letter included endorsements from Jean Bedord, Connie Cunningham & Louise Saadatti, asking for a comprehensive redo of the Housing Element draft.
Delaying HE Filing Resulting in Automatic Default
The new city council did not submit the housing element created by the City Staff for almost three months after the election. The deadline for a compliant HE was Jan 31, 2023, and the City did not submit the draft approved on August 30, 2022 until February 3,2023. This put the city in automatic default, opening the flood-gates to Builder’s Remedy projects and YIMBY lawsuits.
Lobbying HCD to Not Approve Cupertino’s HE Draft
After delaying the draft to miss the Jan 31, 2023 deadline, Cupertino For All, and other YIMBY groups also wrote to the HCD asking for more changes in Cupertino’s draft submission. In response HCD wrote back to the city on May 4, 2023 noting that:
HCD considered comments from South Bay YIMBY,YIMBY Law and Greenbelt Alliance, YIMBY Law, David Kellogg, Cupertino For All, and several residents pursuant to Government Code section 65585, subdivision (c) The draft housing element addresses most statutory requirements; however, revisions will be necessary to comply with State Housing Element Law (Article 10.6 of the Gov. Code).
Back to the Drawing Board
Even though the HCD letter clearly stated that the housing element addresses most statutory requirementsthe City Council decided to completely redo the housing element. The final draft was submitted more than a year after the original deadline, with approval coming in September 2024, more than two years after the August 2022 meeting where the city council discussed the original draft.
While redoing the HE, the elements asked for by YIMBY groups as exemplified by JR Fruen’s letter were incorporated in the HE.
About 1316 homes in the pipeline were removed and not counted against the 4588 required
The buffer to the 4588 requirement was increased substantially from 787 (17%) to 1293 (28%). This forced the city to identify locations to build approximately 1822 more homes than the original plan.
There were extensive modifications to the city ordinances and building guidelines to increase the size of the houses permitted, along with a reduction in parking requirements. This included change the zoning of around 1600 single family lots (R1) on corner lots or those close to retail or major arteries to R3-condo standards which would have allowed big bulk buildings with just 5 ft setbacks and height restrictions relaxed.
Downgrade in Compliance from “addresses most” to “addresses many”
The 2nd draft submitted by JR Fruen led council in October 2023, was judged by HCD as “addresses many statutory requirements”. This was a downgrade in compliance with how the first draft was evaluated by HCD, and led to the settlement of the YIMBY lawsuit.
In January 2024, the city decided to settle a lawsuit filed by YIMBY organizations, allowing Builder’s Remedy projects and also exempting Housing Element sites from CEQA (Environmental Review). Note that the settlement of this lawsuit gave a green light to Builder’s Remedy projects including the giant condominium on Scofied Drive on a single family lot.
Increasing Permitted Home Size: June 18, 2024 Letter from Cupertino For All
JR Fruen’s group, Cupertino For All, also wrote to the City asking for more changes in a letter dated June 18, 2024 (on agenda for July 2, 2024 City Council meeting (File # 24-13102). We are including key excerpts from the letter at the end of this post.
The City Council of Cupertino, decided to adopt most of the demands by Cupertino For All which impact how large buildings can be in different zones of the city (height limits, number of stories, floor area coverage, setbacks from property line) and also reduced parking requirements. Sheila Mohan and Hung Wei voted YES in support of JR Fruen’s proposals, while Liang Chao and Kitty Moore typically voted NO.
YIMBY Sponsored Council
Hung Wei and Sheila Mohan’s support for YIMBY sponsored changes to increase building size, is not surprising. Both of them have been endorsed by YIMBY groups (eg: Sheila in 2022) and Hung Wei in 2020.
Kitty Moore and Liang Chiao opposed the motions since these changes were not recommended by staff or public input, and bigger units are against the mandate for affordable housing. However, since the City Council majority is controlled by YIMBY sponsored candidates, their NO vote did not make a difference.
What does that mean for Builders?
Note that the latest demands by Cupertino For All, have little to do with the number of housing units, but are designed to allow buildings with bigger footprint. In Cupertino, where the average price per square feet (~ $1350) is almost 4X the cost of construction (~$350 sq/ft), every incremental sq. ft. a builder adds about $1000 to their profit.
The very group claiming to champion affordable housing is, in fact, contributing to the inflation of housing prices by changing building regulations to allow much bigger homes than before.
What does that mean for Existing Residents?
We will consider the Evulich Ct development on Linda Vista Drive, which is in the middle of a single family neighborhood, with one or two story homes. The site was up zoned from an R1 site with a maximum density of 5 homes/acre, to R3/TH requiring a minimum housing unit density of 20 homes/acre to a maximum of 35 homes/acre.
Though the R3 zone has a height limit of 30 ft, density bonus laws allow the builders to waive those requirements. Initial designs submitted by Summerhill, are asking for a density bonus waiver for various city requirements including the 30ft height limit.
Note that these exemptions are on top of the home-size enlarging changes demanded by Cupertino For All, many of which have been incorporated in the City’s Code.
Take our City Back from YIMBYs
It’s clear that YIMBY groups like Cupertino For All, are a front to enable builders to make huge profits, without any regard to the quality of life of existing residents. With the backing of the powerful Real Estate lobby, and lawmakers beholden to them (eg Scott Wiener), they misuse affordable housing as an excuse to bypass zoning guidelines in the most expensive neighborhoods in the country.
We have the choice to elect City Council members who are not beholden to these Real Estate interests, and will also consider the interests of the existing residents of the city in their decision framework.
Extracts from Cupertino For All Demands to allow Bigger Homes (June 2024)
Note: The article was updated to reflect new information we unovered about the city’s second HE draft submitted in October 2023. on October 25, 2024.
