Cupertino Matters
- Local news – McClellan Terrace Apartments; Lawsuits over Builder’s Remedy projects
- UPCOMING – City Council, Tues., Apr. 15, 6: 45 Regular, 6:00 Closed
- Cancelled – Planning Commission, April 8, 2025
- RECAP – City Council, Wed. April 2, 2025, 6:45 p.m.; Closed Session, 5:00 p.m.
April is the month of festivals. Don’t miss the largest of the year: the annual Cherry Blossom Festival, on April 26 – 27, in Memorial Park.
Housing for community students is very much in the news, with an article in the Mercury News entitled As the Bay Area looks to increase its housing stock, is there any room for community college students? Several community college districts are taking steps to provide students with on-campus housing. Here in Cupertino, there is overstated controversy regarding the acquisition of McClellan Terrace Apartments by the Foothill-De Anza Community College District as described in this San Jose Spotlight article entitled Silicon Valley college district to add student housing
Since the initial announcement, the FHDA board received more details at their April 7, 2025 Board meeting. The district is buying the complex for $67 million, and will spend an additional $28 million in renovating the complex. It’s a much older facility in need of significant updating and repairs. This is significantly less expensive than the cost of building a new structure for $157 million, which doesn’t include potential land costs. The district will convert the complex to furnished apartments with a total of 332 beds, and have the flexibility to rent according to school year needs, i.e., 10 week quarterly rentals. It’s within easy walking and biking distance of De Anza cCollege, which eliminates the need for daily car trips in and around McClellan. Provisions will be made for families and staff, though details haven’t been worked out. Housing may be included in student financial aid packages, giving the district even more flexibility.
Most of the current tenants will need to relocate, but terms are generous–much more so than if the property were privately acquired: (1) existing tenants may stay up to June 30, 2026 end of school year to find new housing, (2) tenants will receive professional relocation assistance, (3) moving costs will be paid, and other (4) financial assistance as needed. This impacts 33 CUSD students (the equivalent of one classroom in K-8) and a similar number of FUHSD students. Both districts are committed to working with families to minimize disruption to students, with many options since the districts include both Sunnyvale and Cupertino, among parts of other cities. There are 22,107 rental units available within a 10 mile radius of McClellan Terrace apartments (avg. $3,481 monthly rent), with comparable rental rates ($3,554 monthly) and an 8% vacancy rate. Further information can be found at the district webpage on student housing.
With a council majority historically opposed to new housing, and a new city attorney whose firm is known for representing NIMBY cities, it’s no shock that Cupertino is once again facing lawsuits brought under state housing law. This time, the matter involves an interpretation of the process for reviewing applications under the Housing Crisis Act of 2019 with respect to two proposed builders remedy projects, Vista Heights and 20739 Scofield. According to their press release, YIMBY Law Sues Cupertino Twice for Illegally Blocking New Homes:
“The two housing proposals defended by YIMBY Law have faced numerous roadblocks in the application process, and both fall under the Housing Accountability Act’s “Builder’s Remedy” provision, which allows more homes to be built—with affordability requirements—when cities do not comply with Housing Element law. The city claimed that regardless of how many revisions they request in the application, the builder must respond to all of them within 90 days of the first revision request. In these cases, even though the projects are not required to comply with all of the city’s zoning rules, the city illegally demanded that the developers show how they complied with those rules anyway.
“Cupertino has long been a bad actor when it comes to blocking new housing, which is especially egregious considering its status in the global economy as the heart of Silicon Valley,” said Sonja Trauss, Executive Director of YIMBY Law. “We thought suing them the first time would get them back on track, but clearly they need a stronger message. YIMBY Law is here to deliver the message until it sticks. Cupertino must do its part—just like every other city in California—to end the housing shortage and allow the number of homes needed in the community.
[sic]
“Cupertino essentially wants to ask for an unlimited number of updates and changes, all of which have to be submitted to the city within 90 days of the city’s first request for more information,” said Gillian Pressman, Managing Director at YIMBY Law and YIMBY Action. “This would allow a city to ask for more work, such as a change to a large study, just hours before the end of the 90 day period. It’s absurd and unrealistic. They’re clearly doing this to try and get out of building homes, just like they’ve been doing for decades.”
The city’s response by way of a Friday press release failed to address the core issue of allowing sufficient time for two builder’s remedy projects, Vista Heights and 20739 Scofield, to correct their applications. Both were notified that their applications were incomplete.
The press release ignored the reality of the current situation whereby the city issued only 80 building permits for new housing units in 2024, leaving a deficit of 4,431 units to fulfill the city’s RHNA number of 4,588 housing units by Jan. 31, 2031, in only six years. The press release instead focuses on entitlements–including the Vallco SB 35 project–rather than what the city is doing to facilitate production:
“The City is committed under its current zoning to allow for the development of over 5,800 units, exceeding the state’s minimum requirements by approximately 28% or 1,293 units. Moreover, just two years into the eight-year housing element cycle, the City has already approved 2,852 units, with an additional 424 under review. This brings the total to 3,267 units—more than 70% of the required goal.”
So who will prevail in this lawsuit? YIMBY Law and HCD’s interpretation, or the city’s interpretation? Cupertino lost in a prior YIMBY Law lawsuit. The City of Los Angeles previously lost a case on the very same legal issue. So far, no court has upheld the city’s view. It will be defended by the interim contract city attorney from the same firm, Aleshire & Wynder, which racked up over $400,000 in legal bills over Vallco litigation. Suits of this sort also include a shifting of attorney’s fees, so if the project applicants win, the city would have to pay the applicants’ attorney’s fees and fines under the Housing Accountability Act–a number likely to reach hundreds of thousands to millions depending on the city’s conduct.
For research, past issues back to January 2020 of Cupertino Matters are posted on the website. Encourage your friends who would like to become better informed about our community to subscribe to our email newsletter at CupertinoMatters.org.
UPCOMING – CITY COUNCIL, Tues., Apr. 15, 2025, 6:45 p.m., 2025, Regular meeting, 6:00 p.m. Closed Session
Closed Session
Item No. 1: Conference with legal counsel-anticipated litigation; California Government Code Sections 54954.5(c) and 54956.9(e)(1): (1 case).
Item No. 2 Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation pursuant to Government Code § 54956.9: Yes In My Back Yard; Chunhua Tang; and California Housing Defense Fund v. City of Cupertino; Community Development Department of the City of Cupertino (25CV462924). This is the YIMBY Law lawsuit regarding Scofield Drive Builder’s Remedy project referenced previously.
Item No. 3 Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation pursuant to Government Code § 54956.9: Lixin (Leon) Chen; California Housing Defense Fund; and Yes in My Backyard v. City of Cupertino; City of Cupertino Community Development Department and City of Cupertino Planning Commission (25CV462857). This is another YIMBY Law lawsuit regarding the Vista Heights Builder’s Remedy project, with the same claims.
Open Session
Closed Session Report
Item No. 4 Presentation by Santa Clara County Fire Department Assistant Chief Hector Estrada on the Updated Local Responsibility Area (LRA) Fire Hazard Severity Zone Map. These have been recently updated, raising concerns about home insurance.
Ceremonial Items:
Item No. 5: Present proclamation honoring the life and legacy of Ty Bloomquist, a dedicated employee of the City of Cupertino, who passed away on March 28, 2025.
Item No. 6: Present a proclamation and recognize Cupertino’s affiliated volunteer emergency response teams during Volunteer Week, April 20-26, 2025, for their outstanding contributions and dedicated service to the Cupertino community.
Item No. 7: Receive presentation from the Santa Clara Valley Bird Alliance and present proclamation recognizing its 100 years of conservation and community.
Item No 8: Receive presentation from Rolling Hills 4-H Club and present proclamation recognizing its contributions to youth leadership development and service to the Cupertino community.
Oral Communications from the public on non-agenda items precede the Consent Calendar, which contains four routine items. Note that Item No. 12 Fiscal Year (FY) 2025-26 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program, Below Market Rate Affordable Housing Fund (BMR AHF), General Fund Human Services Grant (HSG), Permanent Local Housing Allocation (PLHA), and County funding allocations includes funding for social services in Cupertino which may be eliminated due to Trump Administration executive actions.
Members of the public may speak on any or all consent calendar items when the mayor asks for public comment on the Consent Calendar. If an item is pulled from the Consent Calendar, council’s procedural rules require it to be addressed after all regularly scheduled action items, unless council votes to reorder items on the agenda. Members of the public may comment on that item when it is considered.
Item No. 13: Direct Staff on Commission Review of the Stevens Creek Boulevard Corridor Vision Study. Council is being asked to decide whether to have this study reviewed by the Bicycle Pedestrian Commission based on historical practices or the Planning Commission, which has had minimal engagement with alternative transportation.
Item No. 14: Review future agenda items requested by City Councilmembers. Most of these have been folded into the City Work Program.
Item No. 15: Council Reports, (now submitted in written form) are provided by Mayor Wang, and councilmembers Fruen, Mohan and Wang. Vice-Mayor Moore did not submit a report as of agenda posting.
Item No. 16: Upcoming Draft Agenda Items Report. These are known agenda items for city council. Many items which will appear on future agendas are not scheduled in advance.
CANCELLED – Planning Commission, April 8, Regular meeting
RECAP – CITY COUNCIL, Wed., Apr. 2, 2025, 6:45 p.m., 2025, Regular meeting, 5:00 p.m. Closed Session (Due to Cesar Chavez Day)
YouTube: Part 1 – 1 hr. 39 min.; Part 2 – 2 hr. 27 min.
Closed Session – No reportable action was taken on city manager performance review or anticipated litigation.
Open Session
Item No. 8: Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) among West Valley Cities (Cupertino, Campbell, Saratoga, Monte Sereno, and Town of Los Gatos) for a feasibility study to evaluate the potential of any temporary housing or emergency shelter. This MOU authorized the city to join with five West Valley cities to collectively study the feasibility of developing temporary and emergency housing facilities, and expanding supportive services for the unhoused in the West Valley. Campbell is the lead city with a consulting agreement with Good City Company. There is no fiscal impact to Cupertino at this time. After discussion, the MOU was approved 4-1 with Councilmember Wang voting no.
Item No. 9: Consider the adoption of a City Council Special Project Policy. This minor policy intends to codify the budgeting process for Special Projects, defined as one-time, staff-initiated projects that require City Council approval due to the need for budget appropriations that exceed a department’s base budget. These are separate from the City Work Program (CWP) items. After discussion, council approved unanimously.
Item No. 10: Fiscal Year 2025-2026 Capital Improvement Programs and Five-year Plan. The FY 25-26 proposal for CIP include an allocation of $2 million for new and annually funded projects from the Capital Reserve. The program has 28 existing projects that are a priority to close out. This year, new projects were back to basics in maintaining city infrastructure with priority on health and safety-driven projects. Plans are further impacted by limited staffing resources and only $2 million in funding. New projects are (1) Citywide Facilities Condition Assessment (FCA) Implementation to repair aging infrastructure, (2) Repair various storm drain outfalls following the recommendations of the 2024 Storm Drain Outfalls Assessment, and (3) ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) Improvements (Annually funded), a federal requirement for access to public facilities. Council added moving forward with City Hall Annex design, and a cost benefit analysis of City Hall renovation to come back in October/November. A modified version of the staff recommendation to request future consideration of projects to cut was approved 4-1 with Fruen voting nay.
Item No. 15: Council Reports, (now submitted in written form) were provided by Mayor Wang, and councilmembers Fruen, Mohan and Wang. Vice-Mayor Moore did not submit a report as of agenda posting.
CUPERTINO COURIER: April 11, 2025
The front page picture and photo on page 5 is entitled Good food is the foundation: 14th annual Chefs of Compassion continues to support South Bay nonprofit, West Valley Community Services. Community briefs are (1) Apply to become a teen commissioner, (2) Historical jail tour, and (3) Help build a volunteer base for National Rebuilding Day on April 25. An article of note on page 5 is entitled Don’t stay silent: U.S. libraries need everyone’s support now, which highlights Trump’s cancellation of the Institute of Museum and Library Services funding for the state library which distributes funds to local libraries. There are no legal notices.
CUPERTINO COURIER: April 4, 2025
The front page picture and community brief on page 5 is entitled Noteworthy performance: Belgian pianist set to record live concert at DeAnza College. The other community brief is Sewer upgrades. (1) Meet local officials, (2) VTA oversight and (3) Welcome spring virtually. The sole legal notice are upcoming meetings to approve the FY2025-30 CBDG CONPLAN and FY2024-25 AAP.
Warm regards,
Jean Bedord
Cupertino Matters
Publisher and Editor
