Stockton Mayor Christina Fugazi defended the City Council’s decision to remove District 6 Councilmember Jason Lee as vice mayor, saying the city has the legal authority to do so despite the interim city attorney’s warning that the move carries some legal risk.
Fugazi made the remarks Wednesday during a news conference at City Hall, a day after the council voted 4-2 to strip Lee of the title. The council also voted 6-1 to remove him as chair of the Audit Committee amid concerns about checks from his nonprofit that were returned because of insufficient funds.
Fugazi said the city needs to clarify its charter and council policies, which she described as vague.
“We do have legal authority,” Fugazi said, referring to her authority to select the vice mayor, subject to council confirmation. She said the council also has the authority to change that decision.
Interim City Attorney Donald Larkin told councilmembers Tuesday that the city faced some legal risk because the City Charter does not explicitly address whether the council can revoke a vice mayor’s appointment.
“It’s not a simple question,” Larkin said. “I can’t say that it’s a black and white yes. I think there’s a small risk, but it’s not a non-existent risk.”
Asked the following day whether she was concerned about the legal risk raised by the interim city attorney, Fugazi questioned why Lee would sue the city.
“I can’t understand why a sitting councilmember would sue the city they represent and go after taxpayer dollars,” she said.
Council removes Lee from leadership roles
The council’s decisions followed a contentious discussion Tuesday about Fugazi’s proposal to remove Lee from all council committees and concerns that the changes would leave his district without representation.
District 1 Councilmember Michele Padilla offered an alternative, moving to remove Lee as chair of the Audit Committee while allowing him to retain his other committee assignments. The motion passed 6-1, with Lee casting the lone dissenting vote. Padilla took over the position.
Tensions escalated during the discussion, prompting a recess and the clearing of council chambers amid confrontations between councilmembers and audience members.
Lee had chaired the Audit Committee since the City Council approved his appointment Feb. 4, 2025. The committee oversees auditing services provided by the city auditor and the city’s commercial auditing firm.
Under Fugazi’s original proposal, Lee would have lost all his committee assignments. They included his position as vice chair of the Budget Committee; his membership on the Charter Review Ad Hoc Committee and the Legislation and Environmental Committee; his membership on several joint committees with local school districts and the Port of Stockton; and his seat on the San Joaquin Partnership Board of Directors.
Several residents questioned during public comment why Lee was being removed from committee assignments, arguing that the move would limit District 6’s input on council committees.
Julie Dunning, a community advocate, said a key component of leadership is the ability to work effectively with people with whom one may disagree.
“The removal of the District 6 representative from all committees and commissions is an absolute failure of that model of leadership and has the net effect of silencing the voice of a historically marginalized section of our city,” Dunning said.
Returned checks fuel criticism of Lee
Other residents, like Michele Sherman, who serves on the Chief’s Community Advisory Board, called for Lee to be held accountable for checks issued by his nonprofit, Hollywood Cares Foundation, that were returned unpaid.
Residents cited city records showing three checks from the foundation had been returned, including two written on a closed bank account. Records showed the foundation wrote checks to the city for special events in the amounts of $1,930 on July 18, 2025; $1,095 on Dec. 22, 2025; and $1,930 on July 16, 2026. City records listed the returned checks as general funds donation return checks.
A fourth check from the foundation, for $1,924, was returned in 2013, before Lee joined the City Council, according to city records.
During the news conference, the mayor said the checks covered the use of the city’s Showmobile for National Night Out events in 2025 and 2026 and for Toys for Joy in December 2025. She said the transactions raised questions about the city’s internal controls and Lee’s handling of the payments.
“He should not be responsible for making decisions, and we have over a billion-dollar budget, and he can’t keep these checks together,” Sherman said.
When the discussion returned to the council, Lee accused Padilla and San Joaquin Regional Transit District board member Donald Tafoya of orchestrating the controversy over the returned checks.
“Michele Padilla, your ex-husband’s sitting over there, brought Donald Tafoya here, who did the information request for the checks that all of you are relying on for this circus,” Lee said. “I love the politics, but you were censured for misusing taxpayer funds.”
In November 2024, Padilla was censured by fellow councilmembers for using city money to fund a community barbecue where candidates were allowed to give political speeches. Council policy prohibits councilmembers from using discretionary funds for political events.
Lee said his critics were referring to $4,955 “of an account that has brought millions of dollars to this city” and asked Sharon Dhillon-Ghio, Stockton’s revenue officer, how much money his foundation owes the city.
“Zero,” Dhillon-Ghio said.
Dhillon-Ghio said the foundation owed the city nothing. She said Lee repaid the money as soon as she notified him, although one repayment was delayed by about three weeks while he was traveling.
Meeting erupts during audience exchange
Lee then addressed Sherman, suggesting that her comments stemmed from her son’s loss in the June 2 primary election.
Sherman’s son, Sam Carpenter, unsuccessfully sued election officials in March in an attempt to get on the June 2 primary ballot. He later ran as a write-in candidate for Stockton City Council District 5 but did not advance to the general election.
At that point, Sherman stood up in the audience and said, “He’s not going to talk about my son.” Audience members then exchanged words, and the mayor called a recess.
About 15 minutes later, Fugazi called the meeting back to order and issued a formal warning to everyone who remained in the council chambers. She allowed Lee to finish his remarks. He continued discussing Padilla, noting that she had recently sent voters a mailer mentioning the returned checks and had pledged to remove Lee from the council, though she does not have the authority to do so.
Padilla responded, saying she didn’t know how many times her name had been mentioned on the dais but was “sick and tired” of “being bullied.”
She said the city’s own ledger shows that his deposit was refunded before the checks cleared and questioned what entity refunds a deposit before payment is made.
“Four bounced checks to the city of Stockton, returned and unpaid by the organizations of Vice Mayor Lee,” Padilla said. “Two were written on closed accounts. That’s what’s most concerning to me.”
Councilmembers debate representation
Fugazi’s initial comments focused on concerns about representation and claims that District 6 was being silenced. She said no decisions at the committee level are made until they come before the council.
District 4 Councilmember Mario Enríquez said he disagreed with the notion that committee work wasn’t important. Although the full council ultimately votes on committee recommendations, he said, committees allow three members to focus on a policy and develop proposals. He praised Lee and Padilla for their committee work.
“I enjoy working with these two because we have so many ideas going in terms of policy and what we want to bring,” Enríquez said. “I couldn’t imagine not having the committee work and then coming straight to council.”
District 3 Councilmember Michael Blower pointed to a similar situation in January 2017, when then-Mayor Michael Tubbs removed Fugazi from her committee assignments after his election.
“It’s happened, and it’s unfortunate, and I remember at the time thinking that it didn’t seem fair, and it seemed retaliatory,” he said. “Having that power is not something that should be wielded as a cudgel to thump your other fellow councilmembers if you don’t like them.”
Blower said he understood if Fugazi believed Lee was not suited for certain committee assignments, but he objected to removing all of Lee’s assignments and leaving an entire district without representation on any city committee.
“That just seems kind of harsh,” he said.
Fugazi emphasized that her proposal wasn’t political retaliation but was about city business.
She said the city records on the returned checks were produced in response to a California Public Records Act request and that she had no knowledge of the matter before the records were released.
“They do show something that calls into question whether or not somebody should be in a position of authority in terms of financials,” Fugazi said.
She said that when she previously served on the City Council, councilmembers had to submit event calendar requests at least 45 days in advance, fill out applications, pay fees and deposits and handle insurance.
Fugazi questioned whether payment deadlines had been met, whether any requirements had been waived and why deposits had been returned before the payments intended to cover them cleared. She said she was asking the city manager to review the matter.
The vice mayor called the actions retaliatory, citing his social media posts and views on who should sit on the dais. He said taxpayers spent $60,000 on mediation between him and the mayor and that the mediator warned removing his committee assignments could “blow up the city.”
Fugazi raises broader allegations
At Wednesday’s news conference, Fugazi was joined by Padilla. The mayor said the amount involved in the checks could constitute a felony. She said the checks would be referred to the appropriate authorities but did not identify a specific agency.
Fugazi said she had offered Lee an opportunity to resign as vice mayor before the vote and alleged that she was threatened afterward.
“Behind closed doors, there is much more to it,” Fugazi said. “When I made that offer and was told no, I was then told, ‘Well, guess what, mayor? I have recordings of you, and I can’t wait to release them.’ Who does that? Is that something we want in our elected officials? I would say no.”
Fugazi also alleged that about two months earlier, Lee had offered to resign from the City Council in exchange for her granting him control of the teen center. She characterized the exchange as “quid pro quo” and said she refused.
Lee did not immediately return a phone call Wednesday seeking comment on the news conference.
Fugazi said she did not plan to appoint a new vice mayor anytime soon. She said there was no deadline for appointing a replacement.
Fugazi and Padilla serve on a temporary City Council investigatory ad hoc committee established in November 2025 to review allegations involving Lee.
Fugazi said the committee had met “a number of times” and had examined matters beyond the returned checks during its one-year term.
“I think that this is the perfect opportunity for us to pivot as an entire council and move forward,” she said.