Former Cupertino Mayor Darcy Paul is threatening legal action against the city for what his attorney described as an “ongoing campaign of defamation and intimidation.” But the city is pushing back, calling the potential lawsuit “frivolous.”

In an Oct. 5 letter, Paul’s lawyer, Andrew Pierce of Peninsula-based firm Pierce & Shearer LLP, told the Cupertino City Council that to prevent a potential lawsuit, the council needs to apologize and acknowledge it never had evidence of him committing a criminal offense as well as publicize its policies and procedures on referring former elected officials for criminal investigations.

City Attorney Chris Jensen noted in an Oct. 10 letter in response, “It is unfortunate that Mr. Paul has chosen to threaten to file a frivolous lawsuit rather than reflect on the harm he has done to the city and its residents.”

The threat of litigation stems from a 2022 Santa Clara County civil grand jury report, titled “A House Divided,” about the adversarial relationship between the council and city officials. Soon after, the council commissioned an investigation that found Paul, who termed out last year, had “abusive and controlling behavior” toward city employees.

In the letter, Pierce claims that Santa Rosa-based employment attorney Linda Daube, who conducted the city’s investigation, “took her brief from the council majority to relentlessly and unfairly trash Darcy Paul and others.”

“Her report lacks any semblance of objectivity — anyone who reads it can see that it lacks credibility,” he said. The letter specifically names Mayor Hung Wei, Vice Mayor Sheila Mohan and Councilmember J.R. Fruen as those engaging in an “ongoing campaign of defamation and intimidation.”

In a statement provided by his lawyer, Paul said that councilmembers have “used their position to attack people and cast aspersions rather than doing the work of the office.”

“We lived through unprecedented quality of representation, financial health and thoughtful engagement and outreach,” he said. “And now we have the shutting down of opinions, quiet smears, power-bullying masquerading behind crassly obvious incompetence and self-service, and a bunch of pandering, clueless, do-nothings who can perhaps smile meaninglessly here and there, and babble some nonsense that never advances the substance of any conversation or measure,” he added. “OK, fine. Best of luck with all that. I was wrong when I said nothing would get done. It is going to be much worse than that.”

In her investigation, Daube found when combing through emails that “Paul berated staff, dictated procedures, directed hiring and firing decisions, and intermittently made comments in front of staff, such as ‘remember who you work for.’ ” The former mayor was not available to be interviewed during the investigation.

The council majority ultimately opted to refer accusations about Paul dictating hiring and firing decisions — a violation of the municipal code — to the Santa Clara County District Attorney’s Office for review. The office ultimately dismissed the issue, with John Chase, a deputy district attorney with the county’s Public Integrity Unit, stating the statute of limitations for the alleged crime was only a year and they couldn’t find any evidence in that time period.

In his Oct. 10 letter, Jensen called the potential litigation a strategic lawsuit against public participation — or SLAPP — lawsuits typically used to silence criticism. Jensen told Paul’s lawyer that the state has laws to protect against “aggrieved parties” who use “abusive litigation tactics or seek to use the courts to settle scores against political opponents.”

The city attorney said that the only outcome of Paul’s potential lawsuit would be a ruling in Cupertino’s favor that would come at a financial cost to the former mayor.

Wei and Mohan did not respond to a request for comment, but Fruen told the Mercury News the claims are “meritless and speak to a conspiratorial mindset.”

“It really is honestly unfortunate that Mr. Paul has threatened this action rather than thinking about how we came to this point and what he might have done that resulted in that,” he said. “I think the civil grand jury report and the subsequent investigative report are pretty clear about what occurred. I don’t know if the courts are really the right place to be dealing with one’s bruised ego.”