From: Rhoda Fry
To: Council, City
Subject: Concerns regarding the appointment of Chris Jensen for City Attorney Date: Thursday, March 5, 2026 6:24:33 PM
Attachments: 2024-09-13 EMAIL from Jensen-inappropriate response from CA.pdf Dear City Council,
I read that you are considering hiring Chris Jensen for City Attorney and urge you include a short low-cost separation agreement should you not be pleased with his performance. Jensen worked in Cupertino and at first he was quite good. After a while, his behavior was an embarrassment to my city. He would often storm off the dais or slam down his notebook. In addition to his sowing dissent among council members, some of his land-use decisions have created problems for us now.
1. Like many cities, Cupertino was late with its housing element and faced a lawsuit.
Unlike other cities, Jensen settled by waiving our City’s right to do an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for its Housing Element Update. We have no EIR now.
2. The City is presently putting the final steps in donating land for a 40-unit low-income- housing project. Part of this land is a road where cars park. Now that we are getting into the end-game, it is clear that Jensen failed to take the proper steps in determining how to vacate the land and declare it as surplus.
Jensen refused to show any concern for the mis-allocation of our city’s precious BMR funds to fighting a YIMBY lawsuit. I brought the issue to his attention multiple times, hoping that the City could handle it quietly. I gave up and went to the press. And even after that, he failed to resolve the issue timely. You can read the article here: https://sanjosespotlight.com/cupertino- spent-affordable-housing-funds-on-lawsuit/
You may be aware that members of the Cupertino City Council went through a Civil Grand Jury debacle. Jensen used it to continue to sow dissent. At the time,
Jensen and the council
majority did not like Kitty Moore, who is now mayor. She has resolved many issues that the city had, such as discovering that the city held over $60M in a checking account for years without earning interest (now it is). She had asked our City Manager to see some credit card receipts from a few employees because she suspected abuse – which appears to have happened. Her approach to doing this was correct – she asked the City Manager who complied with her request. However, when the story got into the Grand Jury report, it stated that she had inappropriately requested the receipts from an employee. This incorrect story was used as a narrative to say that she behaved improperly toward city employees, which was not true. I brought this to the City Attorney’s attention during a council meeting when this item was on the agenda and asked that the record be changed. While Jensen agreed that the report was not accurate, he refused to correct the record in a letter that was being prepared in response to the grand jury report. He did everything he could to defame her.
He also presided over a hostile public meeting to dismiss one of our planning commissioners from his post. The man is now a beloved councilmember. The council could have easily dismissed the man during closed session and kept decorum.
Counter to City rules, Jensen also approved a city-paid trip to Taiwan and time off with pay for the City Manager. When residents expressed their concerns about this misuse of taxpayer money, he became upset with the residents. Ultimately, the City Manager was let go.
Jensen also moved forward with reporting one of our former councilmembers to the District Attorney. As that man was an attorney himself, it could have ended his professional career.
Jensen was vengeful and held grudges. Nearly a year later, he sent a missive threatening the former councilmember who had served the city for 8 years. Jensen also lashed out in writing at residents and the victim complained to the mayor at a public mayor meeting about his lack of professionalism. In another instance he emailed a resident, calling her a serial liar, and said, “The City Attorney’s Office does not provide legal advice to member of the public or respond to biased, ignorant, and inaccurate commentary. It is of course your right to say whatever you want, but I won’t engage with serial liars.” (attached)
During team-building exercises, Jensen had his attention in his cell phone and laptop instead of the meeting. The occurred during city council meetings as well.
I’ve said enough but I could say more.
Please proceed with caution.
Sincerely,
Rhoda Fry (City of Cupertino Public Safety Award Winner) 1 Peggy Griffin
From: Christopher Jensen <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, September 13, 2024 10:08 AM
To: Griffin
Cc: Pamela Wu; Sheila Mohan; Kirsten Squarcia
Subject: RE: 2024-09-17 City Council Meeting - Issues/questions with teleconferencing Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
Dear Ms. Griffin:
The City Attorney’s Office does not provide legal advice to member of the public or respond to biased, ignorant, and inaccurate commentary. It is of course your right to say whatever you want, but I won’t engage with serial liars.
Regards,
Chris
Christopher Jensen
City Attorney
City Attorney's Office
[email protected]
(408)777-3105
From: Griffin <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, September 13, 2024 10:00 AM
To: Christopher Jensen <[email protected]>; Pamela Wu <[email protected]>; Sheila Mohan <[email protected]>; Kirsten Squarcia <[email protected]> Subject: Re: 2024-09-17 City Council Meeting - Issues/questions with teleconferencing
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
One more question…
Q5: ADA requirements…Is the remote location ADA compliant? Is that a requirement?
Peggy
On Sep 13, 2024, at 9:55 AM, Griffin <[email protected]> wrote:
From: Rhoda Fry
To: Council, City
Subject: MORE: Concerns regarding the appointment of Chris Jensen for City Attorney Date: Saturday, March 7, 2026 3:09:36 PM
Dear City Council,
Please also consider this video where the City Attorney slammed his PC shut and begins to storm out of a meeting after council voted to extend a meeting by 5 minutes, after his disruption, he sits down:
https://youtu.be/_kaS2nhqpsY?si=msz4M1v8DzhfRjBt
City Attorney acknowledges that a city council member (appropriate) inquiry into credit card usage was inaccurate in material respects in the grand jury report, but he refused to make corrections, in spite of the council member and resident concerns. https://youtu.be/lnC10DDSMDQ?si=napaN5IYDsdnYAmt
I don’t have time to go over the council meetings where Jensen failed in his duty and much of it happened off-camera. I was there when he’d walk off the dais in a huff when he didn’t like a speaker.
Please also consider that the City Attorney refused to respond to a Public Records Request on the City’s cost of the YIMBY lawsuit – it was granted after many months. This also revealed that the cost of the lawsuit had exceeded the original contract and that contract should have been properly extended but it was not.
Jensen also contracted with a private investigator into City Council member alleged behavior BEFORE the new council majority approved it. He had done this on at least one other occasion.
You can also find community input on the City Attorney’s performance here:
11/18/2024
https://cupertino.legistar.com/MeetingDetail.aspx?ID=1243834&GUID=AA898583-52E3- 47BB-804A-
168DCA727C09&Options=info|&Search=Attorney+performance+evaluation#docaccess- 7a58e0897db9ea2593a26d8e36f2a43a5a168c584cb37387332f18410f82c1cc
10/30/2023
https://cupertino.legistar.com/Calendar.aspx#docaccess- 9893f0215af619820102038b8a4fcff5b46fe8117c827a4b7662b19beeb3bd7f
7/6/2023
https://cupertino.legistar.com/Calendar.aspx#docaccess- d1eda261a668d75df4213c8dd26fda1a5386f7ce619e42f7aecdc5dda42f7ddf
Apologies for the jumble of information – I wanted to get information to you as soon as possible.
Regards,
Rhoda Fry
From: Rhoda Fry
To: Council, City
Subject: FW: Public Comment March 9, 2026 Item AA1 City Attorney Appointment Date: Tuesday, March 10, 2026 3:15:01 PM
Dear City Council,
This email was intended to be sent to you on Sunday in advance of your Monday meeting.
Unfortunately, I had a typo in the email address and it bounced.
Please read it when you get a chance.
Thanks,
Rhoda
From: Rhoda Fry <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, March 8, 2026 12:44 PM
To: '[email protected].' <[email protected].> Subject: Public Comment March 9, 2026 Item AA1 City Attorney Appointment
Dear City Council,
Please include the following for public comment for March 9, 2026 Item AA1 City Attorney Appointment.
Some of my friends sent me emails pertaining to the attorney appointment and I’ve glued them together below – they were afraid to comment (perhaps I should be too).
I would like to add that I was alarmed by the press release https://www.paloalto.gov/News-Articles/City-Manager/News-Release-City-Council-to- Appoint-Chris-Jensen-as-City-Attorney and would like to share with you some additional information.
While the press release claims $40M in savings from developer claims, the news stated that Cupertino waived $77M in developer fees. When the Vallco project is built, I have no idea as to how we will be able to afford public safety. Here is an article:
https://sanjosespotlight.com/cupertino-waives-millions-of-fees-for-vallco-development/
While the press release states that Jensen settled for the CDTFA, it was an outside attorney that did the work. And, given the contract that Apple had with Cupertino, it was Apple who would have funded that outside attorney. Furthermore, knowing that the City stood to loose income moving forward, Jensen did nothing to suggest austerity measures.
We are now facing a new problem in Cupertino that is likely connected to his having waived our rights to an EIR for our housing element to settle the YIMBY lawsuit (I believe that Palo Alto had a similar one). There is a large development planned in a very high fire zone with impacted egress. If we had that EIR, perhaps the outcome could have been different. I am worried about the public safety of my fellow citizens.
The rest speak for themselves. Contrary to the press release, he had major lapses in governance and ethics, the Brown Act, the California Public Records Act, land use and environmental law, public contracting, litigation and risk management, utilities and infrastructure, and labor and employment issues.
Sincerely,