The Stockton City Council is preparing to reconsider Jason Lee’s appointment as vice mayor and vote on a new committee roster that would remove him as chair of the council’s Audit Committee.
The council will consider both proposals on Tuesday, following months of public disagreements between Lee, Mayor Christina Fugazi and other city officials over government oversight, transparency and council conduct.
While the proposed committee changes could take effect with council approval, reconsidering Lee’s vice mayor appointment would not automatically remove him from the position. Whether the council has the legal authority to end his term early remains unresolved.
Lee was nominated as vice mayor by Mayor Christina Fugazi during the council’s meeting on Jan. 7, 2025, with the group unanimously approved his appointment that day. His term is set to expire Dec. 31, 2026.
Under the city’s Council Policy Manual, previously approved items may return for reconsideration after six months. However, the meeting agenda acknowledges that the provision does not independently establish authority to remove a sitting vice mayor or override a term established by the City Charter.
The recommended action calls for councilmembers to publicly discuss whether Lee’s continued appointment serves the council’s institutional and operational interests and provide direction on potential next steps.
Tuesday’s agenda does not include a resolution to rescind Lee’s appointment.
The reconsideration would not affect Lee’s elected position representing District 6 or his voting rights on the council.
Lee addressed the upcoming council meeting in a Facebook post, suggesting he could lose both his vice mayor title and committee assignments.
“Well, let me get dressed for mediation. See you at council on Tuesday,” Lee wrote.
He ended the post by thanking supporters, adding, “The work don’t stop.”
Although Lee publicly addressed the proposals on social media, he did not respond to Stocktonia’s request for comment by publication.
Fugazi and Interim City Attorney Donald Larkin also did not respond to requests for comment.
Lee could also lose Audit Committee position
A separate proposal would replace Lee as chair of the City Council’s Audit Committee with Councilmember Michele Padilla.
Under the proposed roster, Councilmember Michael Blower would serve as vice chair, Brando Villapudua as a regular member and Mario Enríquez as an alternate.
The proposed roster does not include Lee in any council committee, commission or outside board position.
The proposed changes, which require council approval, come less than a month after a contentious Sept. 21 Audit Committee meeting during which Lee questioned Stockton police officials and Larkin about the city’s handling of public records requests involving elected officials.
During the meeting, Police Chief Stanley McFadden and Larkin acknowledged that the city had mistakenly released police investigative records and body-camera footage involving former Vice Mayor Kimberly Warmsley, whom Lee defeated in the 2024 election.
The discussion grew tense as Lee questioned why some investigative records had been released while others remained confidential. Police officials maintained that investigative records are subject to legal restrictions intended to protect privacy and ongoing investigations.
Deputy Police Chief Anabel Morris challenged Lee’s decision to revisit the department’s procedures publicly after officials had previously explained them to him in private.
Lee defended his questioning as part of his responsibility to examine city policies and ensure transparency.
“We don’t do all the work of the people in the privacy of our offices,” Lee said during the meeting. “We do have a responsibility for transparency.”
Padilla eventually called for respectful treatment of city staff, and the committee recessed as tensions escalated.
The revised council agenda does not indicate whether the September confrontation prompted the proposal to remove Lee from the committee.
A history of disputes at City Hall
The proposals follow a series of public disagreements involving Lee and other city officials since the current council took office in January 2025.
In June 2025, Lee challenged the city’s use of diversity, equity and inclusion funding for a consulting contract benefiting then-interim City Manager Steve Colangelo. The dispute led to a heated exchange between Lee and Fugazi during a council meeting.
Another controversy emerged over the city’s $50,000 payment to support a May 2025 “Wild ‘N Out” comedy show featuring Lee. An outside investigation found that Lee had not improperly influenced the spending decision or violated conflict-of-interest laws through his participation in the event, although investigators questioned whether he should have recused himself from votes concerning the investigation.
In May 2026, Fugazi barred Lee from participating remotely in a City Council meeting, citing California’s teleconferencing requirements. Lee, who was traveling for work, accused the mayor of silencing his district and subsequently called for her resignation.
The disputes have unfolded alongside broader scrutiny of the council’s operations.
A June 25 San Joaquin County Civil Grand Jury report titled “Governance in Turmoil” identified public infighting, leadership instability, interference with city employees and failures to adequately address previous oversight recommendations.
The report examined the council’s conduct collectively rather than assigning responsibility to Lee or any other individual councilmember.
On Sept. 29, the council unanimously approved its response to the report after receiving an extension to its original deadline. The city partially agreed with all nine findings and accepted eight recommendations, including proposed reforms addressing ethics, council conduct and transparency.
The response also established an interim standard discouraging personal attacks and demeaning statements about colleagues or employees while preserving protections for legitimate policy criticism.
Lee questioned how the city would distinguish personal attacks from disagreements over public policy.
“I think we have to, as a council, define what’s personal because different people up here are going to receive things differently,” he said during that meeting.
The latest reconsideration also follows an earlier attempt by Lee and Enríquez to revisit an appointment in Fugazi’s office.
In July, the two requested reconsideration of a previously approved appointment involving the mayor’s office. The matter returned to the council in August.
The Oct. 13 agenda cites that earlier effort as procedural precedent, although it acknowledges that the vice mayor position is governed by different charter provisions.
Can the council actually remove Lee?
Under Section 1103 of the Stockton City Charter, the mayor nominates a vice mayor, subject to ratification by the City Council.
The charter establishes the position’s term and responsibilities, including acting as mayor during the mayor’s temporary absence or disability.
Although more than six months have passed since Lee’s appointment, satisfying the council’s procedural requirements for reconsideration, the agenda states that any additional action affecting his term would require a determination of the city’s legal authority.
Any future resolution to rescind, modify or replace the appointment would also require appropriate legal review and sufficiently specific public notice, which means Tuesday’s consideration could result in directions for further legal review or a future proposal rather than an immediate change in the vice mayor’s office.
Both proposals are listed consecutively on Tuesday’s consent agenda, which generally allows multiple items to be considered together without separate discussion unless an item is pulled.
The reconsideration item, however, specifically calls for a public discussion of Lee’s continued appointment.
Meanwhile, the proposed committee roster could remove Lee from his Audit Committee leadership position if approved, regardless of whether the council takes further action on his vice mayor title.