File #: 24-1072    Version: 1
Type: Public Hearing
In control: City Council/Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency/Public Financing Authority/Parking Authority Concurrent
Final action:
Title: PUBLIC CENSURE HEARING TO REVIEW THE CENSURE AD HOC COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION, CONSIDER EVIDENCE AND TESTIMONY, AND DETERMINE IF CENSURE IS WARRANTED
Attachments: 1. Attachment A - Complaint, 2. Attachment B - Council Policy 4.08, 3. Attachment C - Council Policy 5.10, 4. Attachment D - Stocktonia Article - Padilla's Party in the Park, 5. Attachment E - Record Article - Nonprofit Donors React to Candidate Speeches, 6. Attachment F - Record Article - Padilla May Face Censure, 7. Attachment G - Video Link - Stocktonia Article (Padilla's Party in the Park), 8. Attachment H - Video Link - 08-20-2024 (Council Meeting Councilmember Padilla's Comments), 9. Attachment I – Councilmember Padilla's Event Documents, Discretionary Fund Request, 10. Attachment J - Censure Ad Hoc Committee Report and Recommendation, 11. Attachment K - 2024-10-24 Notice of Public Censure Hearing - Councilmember Padilla, 12. Proposed Resolution

title

PUBLIC CENSURE HEARING TO REVIEW THE CENSURE AD HOC COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION, CONSIDER EVIDENCE AND TESTIMONY, AND DETERMINE IF CENSURE IS WARRANTED

 

recommended action

RECOMMENDATION

 

It is recommended that the Council review the Censure Ad Hoc Committee Recommendation, consider the evidence and testimony, and determine if censure is warranted.

 

body

Summary

 

On October 23, 2024, the Interim City Clerk received the recommendation of the Censure Ad Hoc Committee directing the report be forwarded to the City Council and the matter set for a public censure hearing before the City Council.

 

Today the City Council is tasked with reviewing the recommendation, considering the evidence and testimony, and determining if censure is warranted.

 

DISCUSSION

 

Background

 

Council Policy Manual Chapter 4.08 (Council Censure) establishes the process for the censure of councilmembers. The process begins with the submission of a complaint by two councilmembers and an initial discussion before Council to determine whether the process should move forward. Absent a unanimous vote by the uninvolved councilmembers (those who did not submit and are not the subject of the complaint), the process continues.

 

On August 2, 2024, Councilmembers Blower and Villapudua submitted a complaint to the Interim City Clerk pursuant to Council Policy 4.08 (Attachment A- Complaint, Attachment B - Council Policy 4.08) requesting a censure hearing regarding an alleged violation of Council Policy 5.10 (Attachment C - Council Policy 5.10) by Councilmember Padilla.

 

At the August 20, 2024, Council Meeting, there was no unanimous vote to stop the process and the Mayor appointed the Council Censure Ad-Hoc Committee pursuant to Council Policy 4.08.020(2).

 

The Ad Hoc met on October 7, 2024, to consider the following evidence compiled by staff:

 

1.                     Complaint

2.                     Council Policy 4.08

3.                     Council Policy 5.10

4.                     Stocktonia Article- Padilla’s Party in the Park (Attachment D)

5.                     Record Article- Nonprofit Donors React to Candidate Speeches (Attachment E)

6.                     Record Article- Padilla May Face Censure (Attachment F)

7.                     Video Link- Stocktonia Article (Padilla’s Party in the Park) (Attachment G)

8.                     Video Link- 08-20-2024 (Council Meeting Councilmember Padilla’s Comments) (Attachment H)

9.                     All documents related to Councilmember Padilla’s Event including the original Discretionary Fund request (Attachment I)

 

Following review of the evidence and discussion, the Committee appointed members Wright and Lenz to draft the censure report and recommendation. The recommendation of the Ad Hoc was received by the Interim City Clerk on October 23, 2024 (Attachment J - Censure Ad Hoc Committee Report and Recommendation).

 

The City Council is now tasked with reviewing the recommendation, considering the evidence and testimony, and determining if censure is warranted.

 

Present Situation

 

The recommendation of the Ad Hoc Committee states in part,

 

“Following review of all compiled facts and evidence, the Censure Ad Hoc Committee finds that the allegations in the complaint are supported by sufficient evidence that a serious violation of adopted City policy has occurred. Specifically, that Council Policy 5.10 was violated because discretionary funds were used at an event where political activity occurred rendering the event political in nature.

The Committee’s determination is supported by the following evidence of political activity:

1.                     Several candidates for local office were present at the event and Padilla invited them to speak.

2.                     The candidate-speakers discussed their candidacy and the upcoming election.

3.                     At least one candidate-speaker encouraged voting for the other candidate-speakers.

4.                     One of the candidate-speakers referenced the creation of a majority voting block. 

5.                     Councilmember Padilla wore a campaign shirt as did one of the candidate-speakers.”

                     

Council Policy 4.08.020 requires that the member:

 

1.                     Receive notice of the hearing. 

 

2.                     Be given an opportunity to be heard during the hearing, including the opportunity to refute evidence

 

Councilmember Padilla was notified of the hearing and provided the Ad Hoc recommendation on October 24, 2024 (Attachment K - 2024-10-24 Notice of Public Censure Hearing - Councilmember Padilla).

 

Council Policy 4.08.020(11) states that “A City Council decision to censure requires the adoption of a Resolution making findings, based on substantial evidence that the member has engaged in conduct that constitutes a violation of law or a serious violation of an adopted City policy.  The resolution must be affirmed by at least four affirmative votes of the Council.  The accused Councilmember shall not participate in the City Council’s deliberations after the Public Hearing is closed or in any vote by the City Council on the proposed censure.”

 

Findings are essentially a conclusion by the Council based on the evidence, testimony, and discussion regarding this item. The findings presented on the Resolution are based on the Censure Ad Hoc Committee discussion and recommendation.  The Council is entitled to adopt as is or make changes if desired.

 

City Council should now, review the recommendation, consider the evidence and testimony, and determine if censure if warranted.

 

FINANCIAL SUMMARY

 

There is no direct financial impact should Council adopt a resolution censuring Councilmember Padilla.

 

Attachment A - Complaint

Attachment B - Council Policy 4.08

Attachment C - Council Policy 5.10

Attachment D - Stocktonia Article - Padilla's Party in the Park

Attachment E - Record Article - Nonprofit Donors React to Candidate Speeches

Attachment F - Record Article - Padilla May Face Censure

Attachment G - Video Link - Stocktonia Article (Padilla's Party in the Park)

Attachment H - Video Link - 08-20-2024 (Council Meeting Councilmember Padilla's Comments)

Attachment I - Councilmember Padilla's Event Documents, Discretionary Fund Request

Attachment J - Censure Ad Hoc Committee Report and Recommendation

Attachment K - 2024-10-24 Notice of Public Censure Hearing - Councilmember Padilla