HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 9a - Proposed Censure and Rules of Procedure
STAFF REPORT
OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER
DATE: September 2, 2025
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Dominic Lazzaretto, City Manager
By: Justine Bruno, Deputy City Manager
SUBJECT: RESOLUTIONS CONSIDERING A MAYORAL CENSURE AND ADOPTION OF
RULES OF PROCEDURE AND DECORUM FOR THE ARCADIA CITY
COUNCIL
RESOLUTION NO. 7649 TO FORMALLY CENSURE MAYOR SHARON
KWAN
CEQA: Not a Project
Recommendation: No Staff Recommendation
RESOLUTION NO. 7652 TO ADOPT A POLICY ESTABLISHING RULES OF
PROCEDURE AND DECORUM
CEQA: Not a Project
Recommendation: Adopt
SUMMARY
During the Special Meeting on August 26, 2025, in a 4-1 vote, the City Council directed
that a resolution be prepared for the censure of Mayor Sharon Kwan. The City
Council outlined the prescribed findings for censure and the associated reprimands,
to be prepared in alignment with the Arcadia City Charter and all applicable laws.
Further, at the August 26, Special Meeting, the City Council directed that a
subcommittee of the City Council be established, including Mayor Pro Tem Eileen
Wang and Councilmember Paul Cheng, for the purposes of developing rules of
procedure and decorum. The intent of establishing rules of procedure and decorum
would be to formalize the unwritten protocols of the City Council, including their
Resolution No. 7649 Proposed Censure and
Resolution No. 7652 Rules of Procedure and Decorum
September 2, 2025
Page 2 of 6
conduct at public meetings and in other public settings, which also incorporate other
protections to ensure civility and efficiency in governance.
There is no staff recommendation for Resolution No. 7649, the proposed censure of
Mayor Kwan. Alternatively, it is recommended that the City Council adopt Resolution
No. 7652, establishing City Council Rules of Procedure and Decorum, with the option
to review the policy in six months.
BACKGROUND
In November 2022, Arcadia voters approved amendments to the City Charter that
established the Mayor and Mayor Pro Tempore as rotating positions. In anticipation
of the passage of the City Charter amendments, Resolution No. 7463 was adopted in
October 2022, establishing the rotation procedure for the Mayor and Mayor Pro
Tempore, including the process for censure.
The City Council held a Special Meeting on August 26, 2025, to consider the censure
and removal of Mayor Sharon Kwan. The meeting was facilitated by City Attorney
Maurer and outlined the legal basis for a censure, including the potential action of
removal from the Office of Mayor. During the Special Meeting, two hours of public
comment from 46 speakers were heard, as well as a summary of electronic public
comment that was received prior to the meeting. Following public comment, the
meeting continued with a presentation prepared by Councilmember Fu, which
outlined his basis for censure. Following his presentation, Mayor Kwan had an
opportunity to provide rebuttal arguments and share information to oppose the
censure.
Upon further discussion by the City Council, in a 4-1 vote, it was moved that the
following would be prepared for the next meeting of the City Council:
1. Prepare Resolution No. 7649 to include the list of “Findings” for censure and
the resulting “Consequences”.
2. Empanel a City Council Subcommittee, consisting of Mayor Pro Tem Wang and
Councilmember Cheng, to work with the City Attorney on drafting Rules of
Procedure and Decorum for the Arcadia City Council.
Resolution No. 7649 Proposed Censure and
Resolution No. 7652 Rules of Procedure and Decorum
September 2, 2025
Page 3 of 6
DISCUSSION
Censure
A censure is a formal resolution of a legislative, administrative, or other body,
reprimanding a person, normally one of its own members, for specified conduct. The
United States Supreme Court has established the legal basis for censure in Houston
Community College System v. Wilson (2022) 595 U.S. 468, and Arcadia’s Resolution
No. 7463, adopted October 2022, outlines the procedure for censuring the Mayor
and/or Mayor Pro Tempore.
As directed by the City Council at the August 26, 2025, Regular Meeting, Resolution
No. 7649, was prepared to incorporate the basis of censure, as initially outlined in
the List of Accusations, from the August 26 Staff Report (Attachment No. 3).
The numerical listing initially presented at the August 26 Meeting, has been largely
incorporated into the “Findings and Support for Censure of Mayor Sharon Kwan” or
Exhibit “A” of Resolution No. 7649 (Attachment No. 1), with the deletion of certain
words and the removal of certain items, as suggested during the deliberations on
August 26. In addition to the specified findings of Exhibit “A”, Section 4 of Resolution
No. 7649, contains the consequences of the formal censure, which specify:
1. Mayor Kwan is relieved of her of her duties to conduct City Council meetings,
and shall not preside over City Council meetings for the balance of her term
as Mayor, and said act of being relieved of her duties shall be deemed a
disability of the Mayor;
2. Mayor Kwan is relieved of her assignments to serve on City Committees and
as the City’s representative on outside agency boards, except where such
boards require that the City’s representative be the Mayor as mandated by
law;
3. Mayor Kwan shall not serve as the City’s designated representative to speak
on behalf of the City Council at outside events or to outside organizations
where the City is to provide a designated representative, however, nothing
provided herein shall disable the Mayor from any public address which is
pursuant to an invitation by the party or organization specifically requesting
Mayor Sharon Kwan to address that party or organization. If an unspecified
Resolution No. 7649 Proposed Censure and
Resolution No. 7652 Rules of Procedure and Decorum
September 2, 2025
Page 4 of 6
speaking engagement or request is made to the City for a public address, then
the Mayor Pro Tempore shall act in place of the Mayor, as a result of the
Mayor’s disability; and
4. Mayor Kwan shall continue to be identified in the official records of the City as
the Mayor for the balance of her term.
Rules of Procedure and Decorum
In addition to Resolution No. 7649, the City Council directed that a subcommittee be
formed, consisting of Mayor Pro Tem Wang and Councilmember Cheng, to develop
rules of procedure and decorum.
For many years, the City Council has generally looked to Rosenberg’s Rules of Order
for its parliamentary procedure; however, there have been no official norms, rules of
procedure, or decorum adopted by the City Council to date. This has worked well for
extended periods, but the lack of clarity has caused issues in times of interpersonal
conflict among Council Members or when the City Council is considering politically
contentious topics. In recent meetings, the City Council expressed a desire to
formalize its proceedings and adopt a policy that sets standards for behavior and
conduct among its members, and when interacting with City staff and with members
of the public.
Resolution No. 7652 establishes a policy for meeting procedures and decorum for
the Arcadia City Council, detailed in “Exhibit A” of Resolution No. 7652 (Attachment
No. 2). The purpose of the proposed policy is to promote mutual respect, civility, and
orderly conduct among elected officials, City staff, and members of the public. These
standards will help maintain the highest degree of personal and professional
conduct in the City’s governance. The proposed policy formalizes many long-standing
traditions and provides additional structure where weaknesses have been identified.
Broadly, the policy seeks to establish clear roles, responsibilities, standards of
conduct, and procedures for the Mayor and City Council, City staff, and the public
during City Council meetings. The policy aims to uphold the integrity of local
governance by promoting civility, transparency, and lawful decision-making, in
accordance with the Ralph M. Brown Act and other applicable laws. Under Resolution
7652, the Mayor presides over meetings and maintains order, but may only act with
Resolution No. 7649 Proposed Censure and
Resolution No. 7652 Rules of Procedure and Decorum
September 2, 2025
Page 5 of 6
the support of the majority. The policy reinforces that all City Council actions must
be collaborative and outlines how agendas are prepared, how meetings should be
conducted, and how decorum will be maintained.
Other major provisions include formal adoption of Rosenberg’s Rules of Order for
procedural guidance and clear standards for respectful behavior during meetings.
The policy details agenda categories, public comment procedures, and the need for
fair treatment of staff and the public. Special rules apply to Councilmember conduct
both during and outside of meetings, including ethical considerations, confidentiality,
and staff interactions. Importantly, the policy outlines enforcement mechanisms for
violations, including motions to restore order, censure, removal from roles, and
other disciplinary actions, ensuring accountability within the body.
The most significant changes to existing protocols would be that the “Council
Comments” portion of the agenda would be removed and replaced with new sections
for AB 1234 Reports and requests for future agenda items, which would occur at the
end of the meeting. In addition, rather than providing a standard of five minutes for
public comment, a sliding scale would be established with suggested time limits
ranging between 2 and 5 minutes, depending on the number of speaker cards that
have been submitted.
It is recommended that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 7652, establishing City
Council Rules of Procedure and Decorum. If the City Council desires, the policy can
be reviewed after a period of time, providing an opportunity to assess its
effectiveness and ensure it is meeting the intended goals. Resolution No. 7652
commits the City Council to reviewing the policy within six months of adoption to
allow sufficient time to operate under the new rules. However, conducting such a
review sooner or later would not be problematic.
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
The proposed action of a censure and/or adopting rules of procedure and decorum
does not constitute a project under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”),
as it can be seen with certainty that either item will not have an impact on the
environment.
Resolution No. 7649 Proposed Censure and
Resolution No. 7652 Rules of Procedure and Decorum
September 2, 2025
Page 6 of 6
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact to implement the consequences of the formal censure as
proposed in Resolution No. 7649, absent any legal challenges that may arise.
Additionally, adoption of Resolution No. 7652, establishing rules of procedure and
decorum of the City Council, has no affiliated costs for implementation either, but
could help the City avoid lawsuits and legal expenses in the future, by having clear
norms for all to point to and follow.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council determine that Resolution No. 7649 and
7652 are not considered a project under the California Environmental Quality Act
(“CEQA”); and:
• Adoption of Resolution No. 7649 is a City Council-initiated action that is wholly
within the City Council’s discretion, and therefore, staff is not making a
recommendation.
• Adopt Resolution No. 7652 establishing City Council Rules of Procedure and
Decorum.
Attachment No. 1: Resolution No. 7649 – Mayoral Censure
Attachment No. 2: Resolution No. 7652 – City Council Rules of Procedure and
Decorum
Attachment No. 3: City Council Staff Report (w/attachments) – August 26, 2025
1
RESOLUTION NO. 7649
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA,
CALIFORNIA, TO FORMALLY CENSURE MAYOR SHARON KWAN
WHEREAS, a censure is formal resolution of a City Council or other governing
body, reprimanding a person, normally one of its own members, for specified
conduct; and
WHEREAS, the United States Supreme Court, in the case of Houston
Community College System v. Wilson (2022) 595 U.S. 468, held that a censure is a
form of constitutionally-protected speech that a deliberative body may lawfully
utilize to reprimand the conduct of one of its members; and
WHEREAS, the City Council expects all its members, including the Mayor, to
treat colleagues, staff, and the public with respect and civility; base public statements
on facts and reasonably accurate and accessible information; abide by the
requirements of the Brown Act and the City’s rules of procedure; work collaboratively
and in good faith with staff and Council colleagues; and uphold the dignity of the
office to which they were elected; and
WHEREAS, the powers of the City Council are in part as delineated by the City
Charter, which provides at Section 405 that all powers of the City shall be vested in
the Council except as otherwise provided in the City Charter; and
Attachment No. 1
2
WHEREAS, pursuant to said authority, and elsewhere under California law and
the City’s governing documents, the City Council is empowered to discipline its
officers and members, including the act of censure, which may include discipline
which will constitute a disability under the City Charter; and
WHEREAS, Section 404 of the City Charter provides that the Mayor Pro
Tempore shall perform the duties of the Mayor during the Mayor’s absence or
disability; and
WHEREAS, the Mayor has been provided with notice and with information
related to the alleged conduct giving rise to a formal censure; and
WHEREAS, at a special meeting held on August 26, 2025, the City Council
received information related to conduct attributable to the Mayor and provided the
opportunity to receive testimony and information to rebut the allegations; and
WHEREAS, based on the findings set forth in this Resolution and all
information in the record of the City Council’s proceedings, the City Council
determines that a formal censure of the Mayor is appropriate.
NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA,
DOES HEREBY FIND, DETERMINE, AND RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The City Council finds that the Recitals set forth above are true and
correct and incorporates the Recitals into its action.
3
SECTION 2. The City Council finds that, on information received during the
proceedings and all other relevant information, Mayor Kwan engaged in the conduct
set forth in Exhibit “A”, which is incorporated herein and which supports the City
Council’s imposition of a formal censure.
SECTION 3. The City Council hereby formally censures Mayor Sharon Kwan as
a result of the conduct described above.
SECTION 4. As a consequence of this formal censure, the City Council imposes
the following actions while Mayor Kwan serves in the office of Mayor:
(i) Mayor Kwan is hereby relieved of her duties to conduct City Council
meetings, and shall not preside over City Council meetings for the
balance of her term as Mayor, and said act of being relieved of her
duties shall be deemed a disability of the Mayor; and
(ii) The Mayor is relieved of her assignments to serve on City Committees
and as the City’s representative on outside agency boards, except where
such boards require that the City’s representative be the Mayor as
mandated by law; and
(iii) Mayor Kwan shall not serve as the City’s designated representative to
speak on behalf of the City Council at outside events or to outside
organizations where the City is to provide a designated representative,
however nothing provided herein shall disable the Mayor from any
4
public address which is pursuant to an invitation by the party or
organization specifically requesting Mayor Sharon Kwan to address that
party or organization. If an unspecified speaking engagement or
request is made to the City for a public address, then the Mayor Pro
Tempore shall act in place of the Mayor, as a result of the Mayor’s
disability; and
(iv) Mayor Kwan shall continue to be identified in the official records of the
City as the Mayor for the balance of her current term.
SECTION 5. If any portion of this resolution is found to be invalid or
unenforceable, such provisions shall be deemed severed and the remainder of the
resolution shall remain in full force and effect.
SECTION 6. This Resolution is effective upon its adoption by the City Council.
SECTION 7. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.
[SIGNATURE ON THE NEXT PAGE]
5
Passed, approved, and adopted this 2nd day of September, 2025.
_______________________________
Mayor of the City of Arcadia
ATTEST:
________________________
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
________________________
Michael J. Maurer
City Attorney
6
EXHIBIT “A”
FINDINGS AND SUPPORT FOR CENSURE
OF MAYOR SHARON KWAN
The following conduct supports the City Council’s censure:
1. Weaponizing and exploiting children, induced to give false and
uninformed statements for political purposes of embarrassing the City, and
Councilmembers, and to escape responsibility through the use of shills and
strawmen. Use of these planted audience members subverts the democratic
process, by taking valuable council and staff time, and cheapening public discourse,
which discourages public participation.
2. Demeaning the military service of veterans by stating she has done
more for veterans by asserting she made unsubstantiated charitable contributions,
and arguing that these were more valuable than respect and appreciation.
Additionally, Mayor Kwan bestowed a commendation on a high school student for
ten minutes of a City Council presentation for “bravery and courage,” while at the
same meeting demeaning a ten-year Iraq and Afghanistan war veteran. This
disrespect for men and women in uniform, past and present, reflects negatively on
the City and is inapposite to the values of Arcadia and its public officials.
3. Knowingly falsely alleging financial impropriety by claiming there is
concealment of the City’s true finances and asserting that City staff is
7
misrepresenting financial information to the City Council and public, and claims that
the City staff is lying to the public, for the political purpose of undermining public
confidence in City staff and the Mayor’s colleagues. Additionally, the Mayor has made
patently false and baseless allegations that the City’s finances are headed for disaster
by the City Council’s conduct, or that reserves are being depleted, all without
evidence, and despite being corrected by City staff with statistical evidence and City
records. The Mayor has accused the City Manager and accounting staff of fraud and
accounting manipulation solely because due to her own lack of diligence, and failed
to obtain an accounting record which was repeatedly emailed to Mayor Kwan. Use
of these shadowy and baseless allegations only serves to undermine public respect
and trust for the City, its workers and representatives.
4. Disparaging first responders, and council colleagues by accusing them
of impropriety and corruption because labor organizations chose not to support her.
These unfair and baseless allegations contribute to loss of public trust in our law
enforcement and public safety agencies, and cause meaningless conflict based on
false statements made for political gain.
5. Making unfounded accusations of sexism against Councilmembers and
staff whenever disagreements arise to deflect argument against her ill-conceived and
unfounded positions on substantive issues. This conduct is a transparent attempt to
deflect responsibility for the Mayor’s improvident statements.
8
6. Discouraging public participation by mocking and belittling
constituents, including elderly residents, by implying their incompetence and
deafness, simply because they were politically adversarial to her or expressed a
conflicting viewpoint, attempting to intimidate opposing viewpoints and to squelch
dissent.
7. Misusing council procedures and engaging in “ambush techniques” by
failing to place items on the Council agenda in order to surprise her fellow
Councilmembers and city staff and failing to consult department heads before
raising issues that could have been resolved administratively, for the purpose of
embarrassing unprepared City staff members and undermining public confidence in
these officials and staffers. The Mayor has also misstated historical Council records
to attempt to infer that the city staff and Council has been malfeasant.
8. Engaging in un-collegial behavior, unprofessional temperament, and
unfounded accusations against Councilmembers simply because other
Councilmembers expressed a differing viewpoint. This behavior subverts the public
decision-making process. By deflecting the argument and attempting to silence
dissent and statements of other Councilmembers to avoid being demonstrated
wrong, the Mayor seeks to use intimidation, strong arm tactics, and fearmongering
in place of reasoned decision making.
1
RESOLUTION NO. 7652
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA,
CALIFORNIA, TO ADOPT A POLICY ESTABLISHING RULES OF PROCEDURE
AND DECORUM
WHEREAS, the City of Arcadia values transparency, civility, and participation in
the democratic process; and
WHEREAS, all proceedings of the City Council are subject to the Ralph M.
Brown Act, which allow for the adoption of reasonable regulations to ensure orderly
and efficient meetings; and
WHEREAS, the City Council recognizes that effective governance requires
respect and professionalism among elected and appointed officials, City staff, and
members of the public; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has a duty to foster respectful dialogue and prevent
disruption, intimidation, or disorderly conduct during its meetings; and
WHEREAS, the City Council Chambers are a place of significance and must be
preserved as a dignified environment that reflects Arcadia’s heritage,
professionalism, and commitment to responsible governance; and
WHEREAS, the City Council believes that City officials have a responsibility to
lead by example by modeling ethical, respectful, and civil conduct during all public
proceedings; and
Attachment No. 2
2
WHEREAS, the City Council desires to adopt a policy that establishes Rules of
Procedure and Decorum, setting clear expectations for meeting procedures and to
promote the highest standards of conduct in Arcadia’s governance.
NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA,
DOES HEREBY FIND, DETERMINE, AND RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The foregoing recitals are true and correct.
SECTION 2. The Rules of Procedure and Decorum (“Policy”) attached hereto as
Exhibit “A”, are hereby adopted in their entirety and incorporated herein by
reference.
SECTION 3. The City Council will review the Rules of Procedure and Decorum
(“Policy”) within six months of its adoption for effectiveness, clarity, and continuation.
SECTION 4. The City Manager and City Attorney are authorized to take all
necessary steps to implement this Policy and to provide guidance on its application,
including any training or procedural adjustments.
SECTION 5. This Resolution is effective upon its adoption by the City Council.
SECTION 6. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.
[SIGNATURES ON THE NEXT PAGE]
3
Passed, approved, and adopted this 2nd day of September, 2025.
_____________________________
Mayor of the City of Arcadia
ATTEST:
________________________
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
________________________
Michael J. Maurer
City Attorney
4
EXHIBIT “A”
POLICY FOR RULES OF PROCEDURE AND DECORUM
PREAMBLE
AUTHORITY
Section 413 of the Arcadia City Charter provides that the City Council may establish
rules for the conduct of its proceedings.
PURPOSE
The purpose of this Policy for Meeting Procedures and Decorum (“Policy”) is to
promote mutual respect, civility, and orderly conduct among elected and appointed
City officials, City staff, and members of the public and to promote and maintain
the highest standards of personal and professional conduct in the City's
governance. While recognizing there are differing opinions and styles, and
disagreement is a part of the public process, the City Council acknowledges and
values its duty to model ethical and civil behavior for City staff and members of the
public. City Council decisions and work, therefore, must meet the most demanding
ethical standards and demonstrate the highest levels of achievement in following
this Policy.
SCOPE
5
This Policy applies to the City Council and to the conduct of the City
Councilmembers while serving on other committees, commissions, or City-
appointed positions, as liaisons to such positions, or as otherwise formally
representing the City. The City Council may extend this policy to any subordinate
boards, committees and commissions.
ROLES OF OFFICERS
The Mayor shall preside over City Council meetings and perform the duties set
forth in this Policy in accordance with this Policy and in the good faith furtherance
of the objectives stated herein. In the absence of the Mayor, the Mayor Pro Tem
shall preside over City Council meetings and perform the duties and functions of
the Mayor as contained in this Policy. In the absence of both the Mayor and Mayor
Pro Tem, the remaining Councilmembers shall appoint a presiding officer for the
meeting. Wherever this Policy refers to the Mayor, it is equally applicable to Mayor
Pro Tem or any other official performing the duties of the Mayor.
The City Council, acting as a body, is ultimately responsible for all actions of this
City. This Policy assigns duties to the Mayor for the sake of carrying out procedure
and decorum. In no instance may the Mayor act without the support of the majority
of the City Council present and voting, and all actions are subject to override or
suspension upon a motion approved by a majority of the City Council.
6
SECTION 1: GENERAL STANDARDS AND PRINCIPLES OF DECORUM
City Council meetings are an important function of representative democracy and
of serving all residents, businesses, and other stakeholders of the City of Arcadia.
The appropriate conduct of such meetings is in the best interest of all involved, and
helps to ensure that the focus is on the business of the City, responsiveness to the
constituency, and good governmental practices. All City elected officials, appointed
officials and employees, along with members of the public, are expected to adhere
to the following standards of conduct:
• Treat everyone courteously;
• Listen to others respectfully;
• Exercise self-control and avoid threatening language and loud, insulting,
demeaning, or offensive communications;
• Give open-minded consideration to all viewpoints;
• Focus on the issues and avoid personalizing debate; and
• Embrace respectful disagreement and dissent as democratic rights that are
inherent components of an inclusive public process and tools for forging
7
sound decisions and allow all parties to speak without intimidation or
interruption.
SECTION 2: CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDAS
1. Preparation of Agendas
The City Manager in coordination with City staff shall prepare all agendas for City
Council meetings and shall determine the items to be included on the agendas. City
Councilmembers shall only add items to the agenda in accordance with this Policy.
Agendas shall contain the following categories in the following order: (1) Call to
Order, (2) Invocation, (3) Pledge of Allegiance, (4) Roll Call, (5) City Attorney Report,
(6) Supplemental Information, (7) Presentations, (8) Public Hearings, (9) Public
Comments, (10) Consent Calendar, (11) City Manager, (12) AB 1234 Reports, (13)
Future Requests, and (14) Adjournment.
2. Ralph M. Brown Act
All proceedings of the City Council are subject to the Ralph M. Brown Act
(Government Code sections 54950 et seq.). The City Councilmembers shall each
ensure that the meetings and their respective conduct are in strict compliance with
the Brown Act. Councilmembers shall not discuss, or attempt to discuss, matters
that are not listed on the agenda and shall not engage in any deliberations,
8
discussions, or actions involving a majority of the City Council outside of a properly
noticed meeting.
3. Specific Rules for Agenda Categories
In order to maintain meeting decorum, ensure that the City Council’s important
business may be conducted, and avoid potential violations of the Brown Act (even
inadvertently), the City Council will adhere to the following specific rules in
conducting meetings:
a. Supplemental Information
This is the portion of the agenda for the City Manager to inform the Council
of information received after the posting of the agenda packet, or
information that may result in a request for re-ordering of agenda items.
The Councilmembers may also make a request (or staff may propose) during
Supplemental Information to add a late item to the agenda. Under the Brown
Act, a late item may only be added if the need for the item arose after the
posting of the agenda and if there is a need to take immediate action prior to
the next City Council meeting. A late item may only be added with a two-
thirds (2/3) vote of the Councilmembers present, or a unanimous vote if less
than two-thirds are present.
9
b. Presentations
Presentations is the portion of the agenda for ceremonial items, such as
where the City Council either receives a presentation from a community
member or organization or presents a proclamation, commendation, or
other recognition of a community organization, member, or other similar
acknowledgment.
City staff will coordinate presentations. Councilmembers may request
presentations at future meetings during the Future Requests portion of the
agenda. Councilmembers, including the Mayor, may not unilaterally
individually direct that presentations or other ceremonial items be added to
the agenda.
c. Public Hearings/Public Comments
The Brown Act requires the City Council to receive public comments on all
agenda items before taking action, and at regular meetings to receive public
comments on all matters within the jurisdiction of the City Council.
No person shall address the City Council without first being recognized by
the Mayor. Any person wishing to speak during Public Comments or on an
10
agenda item, shall first complete a Speaker Card and submit this to the City
Clerk before the Mayor calls for Public Comments.
The City Council should balance the need to give each speaker sufficient
speaking time, while also enabling each speaker to be heard and completing
the business in a timely manner. As a general guideline, the City Council will
endeavor to follow this format:
• If there are expected to be 5 or less speakers, then 5 minutes each;
• If there are expected to be between 5 and 20 speakers, then 3 minutes
each;
• If there are expected to be between 20 and 50 speakers, then 2
minutes each; and
• If there are expected to be more than 50, then 1 minute each.
The Mayor or City Council may always modify the time allotted in accordance
with the rules of procedure contained in this Policy. The time allotted shall
apply equally to all speakers. Allotted time for public comment is non-
transferable; no speaker will be allowed to yield part or all of their time to
another, nor will a speaker be credited with time not used by another.
11
The City Council accepts electronic public comment for its regular and special
meetings. Electronic public comment shall be submitted via email to the City
Clerk, or through the appropriate form on the City’s website. Electronic public
comment submitted less than two hours before the start of the meeting is
not guaranteed to be received by the City Council beforehand. Electronic
public comments may be summarized by the City Manager during the
Supplemental Information section of the agenda, excluding a verbatim
reading of each comment.
Councilmembers should generally avoid responding to public comments and
should not discuss items that are not on the agenda in response to public
comments. Councilmembers may nonetheless refer matters raised to the
City Manager for a brief response or referral to the appropriate staff
member, and Councilmembers may give a brief response to matters of
personal privilege, such as personal attacks, false information about a
Councilmember, or offensive or hate-based speech.
Public hearings are specific items where the Council is legally required, or
otherwise elects, to receive public testimony. Different rules should apply for
public hearings depending on the nature of the hearing. For example, if the
12
hearing involves an application, the applicant would not be held to the
general time allotments for public comments.
d. AB 1234 Reports
Assembly Bill 1234 (2005; Government Code Section 53232.3) allows
Councilmembers to receive reimbursement for actual and necessary
expenses incurred in performing City Council duties, provided that they
make a brief report on meetings attended at the expense of the City at the
next regular City Council meeting.
This item shall be limited to legally-required reports. The Councilmembers
shall not use this item to report on their own activities that are not at City
expense, or to discuss matters that are unrelated to the attendance at
meetings at City expense.
Videos, pictures, and digital content in support of the City Council’s AB 1234
activities shall be provided to the appropriate staff at least 6 hours in
advance of the published meeting time to ensure technical compatibility and
accessibility. Beyond is what is required under AB 1234, staff will not prepare
content for display during this section of the agenda.
e. Future Requests
13
This is the item for Councilmembers to request that items be added to a
future agenda. Councilmembers shall propose that an item be added, and
upon the concurrence of at least two other Councilmembers, staff will bring
forth the item at a future meeting. The proposal may be in a form of a
motion.
The Brown Act specifically allows for Councilmembers to request, during a
meeting, that items be added to future agendas. However, this exception
must be balanced against the Brown Act’s general prohibition of discussing
non-agenda items. When making a request, Councilmembers shall therefore
state plainly the item proposed, without providing argument or deliberation
on the matter. The other Councilmembers shall merely state their
concurrence, if any, in order to avoid a premature discussion of the merits.
Councilmembers may ask limited clarifying questions to understand the
scope of the request.
4. Special Sessions
The City Council from time-to-time may hold special sessions, such as study
sessions and closed sessions. This Policy applies equally to special sessions.
14
Information provided in closed session, and discussions occurring in closed
session, are strictly confidential. Councilmembers shall uphold this
confidentiality and shall not provide closed session information to anyone
who is not entitled to receive it. Other than information that the City Council
is required to report out (which will be done through the City Attorney),
Councilmembers shall not discuss closed session occurrences during any
open session. Councilmembers shall not record any closed session
discussions, nor allow anyone to listen in to closed session through
electronic devices.
SECTION 3: RULES OF PROCEDURE
1. Basic Rules of Procedure
The Mayor is generally responsible to:
• Maintain order and decorum at all City Council meetings.
• State (or cause to be stated) each question coming before the City Council.
• Determine all points of order subject to the right of any Councilmember to
appeal to the City Council.
• Announce the decisions of the City Council on all subjects.
15
• Enforce the provisions of this Policy.
The Mayor shall make a determination of all questions of interpretation of these
rules, points of order or other questions of procedure requiring rulings. Any such
decision or ruling shall be final unless overridden or suspended by majority vote of
the Councilmembers present and voting.
The City Attorney shall serve as the Parliamentarian to the City Council. The Mayor,
or any City Councilmember, may request that the Parliamentarian advise on
matters of procedures and the implementation of this Policy. The Parliamentarian’s
role is advisory and ultimate determination of procedural questions is within the
discretion of the Mayor, with the concurrence or override of the City Council.
2. Adoption of Rosenberg’s Rules of Order
In considering matters of procedure, the City Council will utilize Rosenberg’s Rules
of Order, as made available by the California League of Cities and as updated from
time-to-time, a copy of which is attached hereto. The Rules of Order shall be used
for guidance, but the ultimate determination of questions of procedure shall
remain within the discretion of the Mayor and the City Council. On any issue that is
not addressed by Rosenberg’s Rules of Order, the City Attorney, acting as
16
Parliamentarian shall recommend the proper procedure but shall endeavor to
follow Rosenberg’s Rules of Order.
3. Restoring Order
Subject to an overriding motion, the Mayor may determine that a Councilmember is
out of order for failing to act in accordance with this Policy or the Rules of Order. A
Councilmember, who is out of order, shall no longer have the floor.
Any Councilmember may raise a point of order to determine whether the
proceedings are out of order or whether the Mayor has failed to maintain order. If
the Mayor repeatedly fails or refuses to maintain order, the City Council may make
a motion to restore order by deputizing the Mayor Pro Tem, or another
Councilmember, to take responsibility for the duties listed in Paragraph 1 of this
Section, and to ensure that the meeting proceeds henceforth in accordance with
this Policy.
4. Actions of the City Council
In accordance with the law and Charter, no action of the City Council will be invalid
or unenforceable due to a failure to comply with this Policy or any procedural rule.
SECTION 4: RULES OF DECORUM
17
1. Decorum at Public Meetings
Councilmembers’ conduct at City Council meetings and other public meetings shall
adhere to the following standards:
(a) Councilmembers shall each preserve order and decorum. No
Councilmember shall delay or interrupt the proceedings of the City
Council or disturb any member of the public while he or she is
properly recognized and addressing the City Council.
(b) Councilmembers shall treat everyone with respect by actively listening
to other viewpoints, and not interrupting, ignoring, or belittling the
contributions of others. Councilmembers will use professional
language.
(c) Councilmembers shall not engage in any abusive or vulgar language
and shall avoid personal attacks on any other member of the City
Council, City staff or the public; nor shall they publicly impugn the
integrity or honesty of such individuals.
(d) Councilmembers desiring to speak shall address the Mayor and, upon
recognition by the Mayor, shall confine themselves to the question
under debate. The Mayor shall recognize Councilmembers in a fair
18
manner and shall not show favor or preference to or against any
individual Councilmember.
(e) Once recognized by the Mayor, a Councilmember shall not be
interrupted when speaking unless called to order by the Mayor, unless
a point of order or personal privilege is raised by another
Councilmember, or unless the speaker chooses to yield to questions
from another Councilmember.
(f) If a Councilmember is called to order, that Councilmember shall cease
speaking immediately until the question of order is determined. If
ruled to be in order, the Councilmember shall be permitted to
proceed. If ruled to not be in order, the Councilmember shall remain
silent or shall alter their remarks so as to comply with the rules of the
City Council.
(g) Councilmembers desiring to question City staff shall address their
question to the City Manager or City Attorney, in appropriate cases,
who shall be entitled either to answer the inquiry themselves or
designate some member of City staff for that purpose.
19
(h) Councilmembers may ask each other questions during the debate of
items, but no Councilmember is obligated to respond to another.
Questions to each other should be posed in a respectful manner in
order to understand the position of the other Councilmembers.
Questions should not be used to embarrass or humiliate other
Councilmembers.
(i) Discussion by Councilmembers must relate to the subject matter at
hand and shall be relevant and pertinent to allow for the expeditious
disposition and resolution of the business before the City Council.
(j) Councilmembers shall make impartial decisions in the best interest of
the City, free of narrow political interests, financial, and other personal
interests that impair independence of judgment or action, and are
consistent with, but not limited to, the requirements of the Political
Reform Act and other State and local laws.
(k) Councilmembers must allow for adequate discussion of the minority
point of view. Councilmembers shall recognize and accept legitimate
differences of opinion. Councilmembers shall act with integrity in
accepting, supporting, and defending the City Council. Once the City
Council takes action, Councilmembers should commit to supporting
20
said action and not create barriers to the implementation of said
action.
(l) Councilmembers shall respect confidences and information
designated as "confidential" and not disclose information received
during any Closed Session of the City Council held pursuant to State
law. Councilmembers shall also not discuss matters that are
inappropriate to discuss publicly, such as personnel matters or
matters involving individuals’ private interests.
(m) Any Councilmember may move to require the Mayor to enforce the
rules of decorum and order, and the affirmative vote of a majority of
the City Council shall require the Mayor to do so.
(n) Councilmembers are prohibited from using cellular phones for calls,
texting, or web browsing during City Council meetings. However, the
use of phones, tablets, or similar devices is permitted for reading
prepared remarks or referencing notes. If a Councilmember must use
a phone for any other reason, they shall step away from the dais.
2. Decorum in Interactions with Staff at Public Meetings
21
In addition to provisions in Paragraph 1 of this Section, the City Council shall ensure
that it maintains decorum in:
(a) Councilmembers are encouraged to ask questions of staff in order to
generate information that is beneficial to the proceedings and the
public. Questions should be posed to staff in a manner that is
objective and that provides a fair opportunity for staff to respond in
their best professional judgment.
(b) In posing questions to staff, Councilmembers should avoid “gotcha” or
“ambush” efforts that are designed to embarrass the staff member or
make it appear as if the staff member failed to adequately perform
their duties. Councilmembers shall ensure that staff has an
opportunity to respond or to clarify their responses.
(c) Councilmembers may be critical of the City’s performance and may ask
questions or make comments that illustrate their displeasure in some
approach or action taken by the City. Such questions and comments
shall be made professionally and constructively and not in a manner
involving personal attacks or involving innuendo of improper conduct.
22
(d) Councilmembers shall not make comments that are intended to create
an improper presumption that any member of staff is being dishonest
or concealing information, and Councilmembers shall not make
unfounded accusations against any staff members. This provision shall
not be interpreted to limit the City Council’s oversight of the City and
critical efforts to ensure open and transparent information is
conveyed.
(e) Councilmembers shall comply with Section 406(b) of the City Charter,
which prohibits the City Council from giving direct orders to
administrative staff or from calling for the appointment or removal of
any person to or from an administrative position within the City,
whether publicly or privately.
(f) Although Councilmembers are encouraged to ask staff questions
during the City Council meeting, Councilmembers shall not inquire into
staff unless it is on the agenda. Further, prior to inquiring with a City
staff member, the Councilmember shall announce whether they have
met with the City Manager or Department Director to inquire into this
issue, before bringing it up at the City Council meeting.
3. Decorum in Interactions with the Public at Public Meetings
23
(a) Public participation and input is critical to the decision-making process
in a representative democracy, and the Councilmembers should
encourage public comments, including public comments that may be
critical of the City Council or the City.
(b) The appropriate level of direct interaction between the
Councilmembers and the public shall depend on the nature of the
proceeding. During general public comment periods, questions of the
commenters should generally be limited. During public hearings, more
robust questioning may be appropriate, particularly if the City Council
is serving in a quasi-judicial role.
(c) The Councilmembers should avoid arguments or back-and-forth
encounters with the public. Both public comments and public hearings
should proceed in an orderly manner, where Councilmembers speak
or respond when given the floor. Councilmembers should avoid
engaging with unruly audience members, except to call for order in the
proceedings.
4. Rules of Decorum for Councilmembers While in Office.
Councilmembers have a duty to:
24
(a) Prepare for meetings by understanding the background, purpose, and
arguments for and against items of business.
(b) Seek background information about agenda items and operational
matters by contacting the City Manager and providing adequate notice
of issues that arise before meetings, including, but not limited to, a
potential conflict of interest with an agenda item.
(c) Avoid making individual pronouncements and public conjectures
outside of City Council meetings about the City on matters not yet
decided by the City Council but is on an upcoming City Council agenda.
(d) Abide by and defend all applicable laws and policies, especially the
political campaign, lobbying, and conflict of interest laws enforced by
the Fair Political Practices Commission, State laws, and the Procedures
Handbook.
(e) Safeguard the ability to make independent, objective, fair and
impartial judgments by scrupulously avoiding financial and social
relationships and transactions that may compromise, or give the
appearance of compromising, objectivity, independence, and honesty.
25
(f) Carefully consider if exceeding or appearing to exceed authority of
office for personal or financial gain. When in doubt, avoid actions that
create, in the mind of a reasonable observer, the appearance of
impropriety, ethical lapses, legal violations, or actions inconsistent with
this Policy.
(g) Deter rumors and misunderstandings by making factual information
available, answering questions directly, telling the truth, and admitting
to a lack of knowledge, if necessary.
(h) Refrain from making unauthorized commitments or promises of any
kind purporting to bind the City. Refrain from any gratuitous
comments that may harm the City's position in litigation or potential
litigation.
(i) Refer citizen complaints to the City Manager.
(j) Refrain from using status as a public office holder to influence the
outcome of a community meeting or purport to represent the City
Council as a whole unless otherwise authorized to by the majority of
the City Council. Remain a neutral observer, indicating when
26
expressing personal opinions, and referring questions related to City
policies to the City Manager.
(k) Refrain from contacting City staff directly, questions to City staff
should be channeled through the City Manager so that appropriate
lines of communication are open and effectively utilized.
(l) Utilize City resources, including but not limited to, equipment,
supplies, staff time, telephones, and computers in a manner
consistent with City policies, the Political Reform Act, and State laws.
5. Rules of Decorum for Public Participation in Council Meetings.
To facilitate effective participation in Council Meetings by the public, the
following conditions shall be applied to audience members:
(a) Members of the public shall mute electronic devices that are capable
of emitting sound, including cellular telephones, digital tablets,
laptops, and personal devices.
(b) Cameras and recording equipment may be used during Council
meetings as long as it does not impede walkways or otherwise disrupt
the conduct of the meeting.
27
(c) Members of the public may make oral communications but are not
authorized to display content on City devices. Members of the public
may provide printed materials to the City Clerk for transmission to the
City Council during the meeting.
(d) Members of the audience shall not engage in disorderly conduct,
including loud, threatening, or abusive language; or other acts that
would disturb, disrupt, or impede the orderly conduct of the City
Council meeting. Following a warning, a member of the audience
continuing to engage in disruptive conduct shall, at the discretion of
the Mayor or a majority of the Council Members, be subject to removal
from that meeting by the Sergeant at Arms. Threats or acts of violence
will not be tolerated and will be subject to immediate removal.
SECTION 5: VIOLATIONS OF POLICY
1. Motion to Enforce.
Most violations of this Policy should be subject to simple corrections and continuing
on with the proceedings in accordance with this Policy. The Mayor should generally
enforce this Policy and correct violations as appropriate.
28
If the Mayor fails to enforce this Policy, any Councilmember may move the City
Council to require the Mayor to do so, and an affirmative vote of a majority of the
City Council shall require them to do so. If the Mayor of the City Council fails to
carry out the will of a majority of the City Council, the majority of the City Council
may make a motion to restore order as set forth in this Policy.
2. Formal Action
If after receiving a warning from the Mayor or City Council, a Councilmember
continues to fail to comply with this Policy, the City Council may agendize an item
for the next meeting of the City Council to discuss the conduct and have the City
Council determine if the conduct is in violation of this Policy. If a majority of the City
Council by affirmative vote determines the conduct was in violation of this Policy,
the majority of the City Council may impose by affirmative vote any of the following
remedial actions:
• Issue a letter of warning from the City Council;
• Adopt a resolution expressing disapproval of the conduct of the
Councilmember and censure by the City Council;
• Remove the Councilmember from their position on City committees or
revoke their appointment to other agency committees;
29
• Take any other action that is within the City Council’s discretion to impose as
a censure; or
• Remove the Councilmember from their position as Mayor or Mayor Pro Tem
by a four-fifths (4/5) vote, as applicable, and select a successor to such office
pursuant to Resolution 7463.
STAFF REPORT
OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY
DATE: August 26, 2025
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Michael J. Maurer, City Attorney
SUBJECT: RESOLUTION NOS. 7649 AND 7650 TO CONSIDER A PROPOSED
CENSURE OF MAYOR SHARON KWAN
CEQA: Not a Project
Recommendation: No Staff Recommendation
SUMMARY
During the Regular Meeting of August 19, 2025, Council Member Fu made a request
to hold a Special Meeting on August 26, 2025, to consider the censure of Mayor Kwan.
The meeting request was supported by Council Members Cao and Cheng, obtaining
the necessary majority to proceed with a Special Meeting under Section 408 of the
Arcadia City Charter.
The request specified that the special meeting would contain an agenda item to
consider having Mayor Kwan relinquish her procedural duties to chair and lead
meetings for the City; relinquish any committee assignments on behalf of the City;
and relinquish any ability to speak publicly on behalf of the City. Pursuant to the
Ralph M. Brown Act, Council Members may request items be added at a future
meeting but may not discuss items that are not on the agenda. Therefore, this matter
is coming before the City Council for its initial consideration and discussion.
Council Member Fu has prepared the bases for which he proposes a censure, which
have been included as proposed findings to be incorporated to a potential resolution
of censure. At the special meeting, the City Council should receive additional
information as to the grounds for any censure. The City Council must then provide
the Mayor with an opportunity to respond to and rebut the proposed grounds for a
censure. The City Council should then determine which course of action it will take.
Attachment No. 3
Resolutions No. 7649 & 7650 Proposed Censure of Mayor
August 26, 2025
Page 2 of 5
If the City Council elects to censure, it may – but is not required to – impose actions
as a consequence of the censure. A consequence may include removal from the
office of Mayor or some lesser action, including a simple reprimand. The City Council
may also consider alternatives to imposing a censure.
BACKGROUND
A censure is a formal resolution of a legislative, administrative, or other body,
reprimanding a person, normally one of its own members, for specified conduct. In
Houston Community College System v. Wilson (2022) 595 U.S. 468, the United States
Supreme Court upheld the use of a censure as a means for a public board to
reprimand one of its members. As explained by the Court’s unanimous opinion, the
censure “was a form of speech by elected representatives” that “concerned the public
conduct of another elected representative.”
A censure may take many forms and is usually enacted through adoption of a
resolution. The censure may be a written reprimand and may impose limited
disciplinary actions. For example, in the Houston Community College System case, the
board voted that the censured member would be ineligible for certain Board officer
positions, ineligible for reimbursement of any related travel, and any future funding
requests for community affairs would require Board approval. The board also
recommended that the censured member "complete additional training relating to
governance and ethics.”
At the November 8, 2022, election, Arcadia voters approved Measure CA, which
modernized the City’s Charter and established district-based City Council elections.
The Charter amendments included the rotation of the Mayor and Mayor Pro
Tempore, which should occur approximately every 9.5 months. Measure CA passed
with 66.8% of the vote and directed the City Council to adopt, by ordinance or
resolution, an appropriate procedure for implementing the rotation requirement.
In preparation for the passage of Measure CA, the City Council adopted Resolution
No. 7463, which established the rotation procedure for the Mayor and Mayor Pro
Tempore, including the process for removal from office. Through Resolution No.
7463, the Mayor or Mayor Pro Tem can be removed for failure to perform official
duties, or upon formal censure from the City Council. Resolution No. 7463 further
provides that if a City Council Member serving as Mayor receives a formal censure, a
Resolutions No. 7649 & 7650 Proposed Censure of Mayor
August 26, 2025
Page 3 of 5
supermajority vote of four-fifths (4/5) of the City Council is necessary to remove the
Council Member from the position of Mayor. Should that occur, the removed officer
would remain a member of the City Council. A simple majority must then select a
Council Member to fill the remainder of the 9.5-month rotation term.
DISCUSSION
The Charter does not define the specific conduct that must give rise to a formal
censure, nor does the City have policies or procedures to define the censure process
or the specific conduct that would be subject to censure. However, the City Council
should follow a fair and professional process that takes into account the interests of
all involved Council Members. The process should provide notice and an opportunity
to be heard, and provide an opportunity to raise counter-arguments and defenses.
The City Council should therefore:
1. Consider the censure in an open session in accordance with the Brown Act;
2. Give notice of the basis and reasons for the consideration of the censure;
3. Allow the Mayor to provide rebuttal arguments and give information to
oppose the imposition of a censure;
4. If it finds appropriate, adopt its findings on the record and through a written
resolution; and
5. State within the resolution the actions being imposed as a result of the
censure.
It is recommended that the City Attorney act as facilitator for this process to ensure
that the hearing is conducted fairly for all parties and in accordance with best
practices.
The motion of the censure, as proposed by Council Member Fu at the August 19 City
Council Meeting, is to have Mayor Kwan:
1. Relinquish procedural duties to chair and lead meetings for the City;
2. Relinquish any committee assignments on behalf of the City; and
3. Relinquish any ability to speak publicly on behalf of the City.
The City Council is not limited to these suggestions and should determine the
appropriate scope of the censure, if any, after hearing the arguments presented. In
Resolutions No. 7649 & 7650 Proposed Censure of Mayor
August 26, 2025
Page 4 of 5
particular, the City Council should bear in mind that, to date, there has only been a
request to call a special meeting. The City Council should not presume that a censure
is appropriate. It will need to hear the relevant information prior to making a
determination. The City Council may determine that there are no grounds for
censure, or that some lesser action or other alternative is a preferred course.
If the City Council finds that a censure is justified, it may consider a variety of
disciplinary actions. While a supermajority vote is necessary for removal from serving
as Mayor, a simple majority is sufficient to impose any other censure actions. The
City Council may not remove any member from serving on the City Council or impose
penalties that are not within the discretion of the City Council.
Should the City Council wish to proceed with a censure, findings within a resolution
should be based on specific conduct and should identify conduct that is sufficiently
improper to justify the censure; this is especially true if the censure would include
the removal from the office of Mayor. The actions being imposed should result from
the findings of improper conduct. Resolution No. 7649 proposes censure of Mayor
Kwan, including the “Findings of the City Council” outlined in Exhibit “A” and the
“Actions of Reprimand” outlined in Exhibit “B” (Attachment No. 1). The action requires
a simple majority vote of the City Council to effectuate.
If the City Council seeks removal of Mayor Kwan from office after censure, Resolution
No. 7650 should be adopted (Attachment No. 2), which incorporates the findings that
would be listed in Resolution No. 7649. This action would remove Council Member
Kwan from the Mayoral office, without removal from the Arcadia City Council. This
action requires a supermajority vote of four-fifths (4/5) of the City Council to
effectuate.
A list of accusations against Mayor Kwan, as characterized by Council Member Fu,
can be found in Attachment No. 3 - Exhibit “A”.
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
The proposed action of a censure does not constitute a project under the California
Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), as it can be seen with certainty that it will have
no impact on the environment.
Resolutions No. 7649 & 7650 Proposed Censure of Mayor
August 26, 2025
Page 5 of 5
FISCAL IMPACT
Without knowing the extent of any actions that might be imposed, it is difficult to
identify the costs of a potential censure. However, the fiscal impact would likely entail
minor staff time and costs that would be within existing budgets, with the exception
of any legal challenges that may arise.
RECOMMENDATION
This is a City Council-initiated action that is wholly within the City Council’s discretion,
and staff, therefore, is not making a recommendation.
Attachment No. 1: Resolution No. 7649 – Mayoral Censure
Attachment No. 2: Resolution No. 7650 – Mayoral Removal
Attachment No. 3: Exhibit “A” – List of Accusations
Attachment No. 4: Resolution No. 7463 – Adopted October 4, 2022
1
RESOLUTION NO. 7649
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA,
CALIFORNIA, TO FORMALLY CENSURE MAYOR SHARON KWAN
WHEREAS, a censure is formal resolution of a City Council or other governing
body, reprimanding a person, normally one of its own members, for specified
conduct; and
WHEREAS, the United States Supreme Court, in the case of Houston
Community College System v. Wilson (2022) 595 U.S. 468, held that a censure is a
form of constitutionally-protected speech that a deliberative body may lawfully
utilize to reprimand the conduct of one of its members; and
WHEREAS, the Mayor has been provided with information related to the
alleged conduct giving rise to a formal censure; and
WHEREAS, at a special meeting held on August 26, 2025, the City Council
received information related to conduct attributable to the Mayor and provided the
opportunity to receive testimony and information to rebut the allegations; and
WHEREAS, based on the findings set forth in this Resolution and all
information in the record of the City Council’s proceedings, the City Council
determines that a formal censure of the Mayor is appropriate.
NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA,
DOES HEREBY FIND, DETERMINE, AND RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
Attachment No. 1
2
SECTION 1. The City Council finds that the Recitals set forth above are true and
correct and incorporates the recitals into its action.
SECTION 2. The City Council makes the following findings set forth in Exhibit
“A”, attached hereto and incorporated herein.
SECTION 3. Based on the foregoing findings, the City Council hereby imposes
a formal censure on Mayor Sharon Kwan as a result of the conduct described in the
City Council’s findings.
SECTION 4. As a consequence of this formal censure, the City Council imposes
the following actions set forth in Exhibit “B”, attached hereto and incorporated
herein.
SECTION 5. If any portion of this resolution is found to be invalid or
unenforceable, such provisions shall be deemed severed and the remainder of the
resolution shall remain in full force and effect.
SECTION 6. This Resolution is effective upon its adoption by the City Council.
SECTION 7. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.
[SIGNATURES ON THE NEXT PAGE]
3
Passed, approved, and adopted this 26th day of August, 2025.
_____________________________
Mayor of the City of Arcadia
ATTEST:
________________________
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
________________________
Michael J. Maurer
City Attorney
4
EXHIBIT “A”
FINDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
The City Council further finds as follows:
5
EXHIBIT “B”
ACTIONS OF REPRIMAND
The City Council hereby imposes the following actions of reprimand:
1
RESOLUTION NO. 7650
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA,
CALIFORNIA, REMOVING COUNCIL MEMBER SHARON KWAN FROM THE
OFFICE OF MAYOR AS A RESULT OF FORMAL CENSURE
WHEREAS, a censure is formal resolution of a City Council or other governing
body, reprimanding a person, normally one of its own members, for specified
conduct; and
WHEREAS, the United States Supreme Court, in the case of Houston
Community College System v. Wilson (2022) 595 U.S. 468, held that a censure is a
form of constitutionally-protected speech that a deliberative body may lawfully
utilize to reprimand the conduct of one of its members; and
WHEREAS, in 2022, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 7451, placing a
series of amendments to the Arcadia City Charter to the voters of the City for
approval; and
WHEREAS, the City Council-proposed ballot measure became Measure CA,
which included an amendment to Section 404 of the City Charter to establish a nine
and one-half month rotation for Mayor, so that each of the five Council Members
would serve as Mayor at least once during a four-year period; and
WHEREAS, the City Council-proposed ballot measure mandates that the City
Council adopt an appropriate procedure for implementing the Mayoral rotation
Attachment No. 2
2
requirement by ordinance or resolution, and thereby, directing the City Council to
exercise its discretion to determine the procedures for the rotation; and
WHEREAS, in 2022, prior to the election on Measure CA, the same City Council
that placed Measure CA on the ballot also adopted Resolution No. 7463 to establish
the procedures for the Mayoral rotation, vacancy, and removal, which took effect
concurrently with the passage of Measure CA; and
WHEREAS, Section 4 of Resolution No. 7463, provides that if the Mayor receives
a formal censure from the City Council, the Mayor may be removed from the office
of Mayor by a four-fifths (4/5) vote of the entire City Council; and
WHEREAS, the Mayor has been provided with information related to the
alleged conduct giving rise to a formal censure, as provided in Resolution No. 7649;
and
WHEREAS, at a special meeting held on August 26, 2025, the City Council
received information related to conduct attributable to the Mayor and provided the
opportunity to receive testimony and information to rebut the allegations; and
WHEREAS, based on the findings set forth in Resolution No. 7649 and all
information in the record of the City Council’s proceedings, the City Council
determines that removal of Council Member Sharon Kwan from the Office of Mayor
is appropriate.
3
NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA,
DOES HEREBY FIND, DETERMINE, AND RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The City Council finds that the Recitals set forth above are true
and correct and incorporates the recitals into its action.
SECTION 2. The City Council finds that the Recitals set forth in Resolution No.
7649 are true and correct, and are incorporated herein.
SECTION 3. Based on the severity of the foregoing findings, the City Council
hereby finds and determines that the following additional action is warranted and
shall be imposed as a consequence of this formal censure:
a. Council Member Kwan is hereby removed from the office of Mayor
pursuant to Section 404 of the City Charter and Resolution 7463.
SECTION 4. If any portion of this resolution is found to be invalid or
unenforceable, such provisions shall be deemed severed and the remainder of the
resolution shall remain in full force and effect.
SECTION 5. This Resolution is effective upon its adoption by the City Council.
SECTION 6. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.
[SIGNATURES ON THE NEXT PAGE]
4
Passed, approved, and adopted this 26th day of August, 2025.
_____________________________
Mayor of the City of Arcadia
ATTEST:
________________________
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
________________________
Michael J. Maurer
City Attorney
Attachment No. 3
Exhibit “A”
RESOLUTION NO. ____
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA CENSURING MAYOR SHARON KWAN
FOR CONDUCT UNBECOMING OF AN ELECTED OFFICIAL AND THE OFFICE OF THE MAYOR
WHEREAS,
Members of the City Council are expected to uphold the highest standards of honesty, integrity, respect,
professionalism, and accountability in their interactions with colleagues, city staff, first responders, and
the public; and
WHEREAS,
Mayor Kwan has repeatedly engaged in conduct inconsistent with these standards, reducing the
conduct of City Council meetings to political exercises and grandstanding, and abused her office for
personal gain, by engaging in the following types of misconduct, and when confronted, fails to accept
responsibility and denies wrongdoing:
1. Weaponizing and exploiting children, induced to give false and uninformed statements, and
giving false names to conceal their identities, for political purposes of embarrassing the city,
and councilmembers, and to escape responsibility through the use of shills and strawmen. Use
of these planted audience “trolls” subverts the democratic process, by implying false support for
her interests, taking valuable council and staff time, and cheapening public discourse, which
discourages public participation.
2. Demeaning the military service of veterans by stating she has done more for veterans by
asserting she made unsubstantiated charitable contributions, and arguing that these were more
valuable than respect and appreciation. Additionally, Mayor Kwan bestowed a commendation
on a high school student for ten minutes of public comment, for “bravery and courage,” while at
the same meeting, demeaning a ten year Iraq and Afghanistan war veteran. This disrespect for
men and women in uniform, past and present, reflects negatively on the City and is inapposite
to the values of Arcadia and its public officials.
3. Knowingly falsely alleging financial impropriety by claiming there is concealment of the city’s
true finances and asserting that city staff are misrepresenting financial information to the
Council and public, and claims that the city staff is lying to the public, for the political purpose of
undermining public confidence in city staff and the Mayor’s colleagues. Additionally, the
Mayor has made patently false and baseless allegations that the City’s finances are headed for
disaster by the City Council’s conduct, or that reserves are being depleted, all without evidence,
and despite being corrected by city staff with statistical evidence and city records. The Mayor
has accused the city manager and accounting staff of fraud and accounting manipulation solely
because due to her own lack of diligence, failed to obtain an accounting record which was
repeatedly emailed to Mayor Kwan. Use of these shadowy and baseless allegations only serves
to undermine public respect and trust for the City, its workers and representatives.
Attachment No. 3
Exhibit “A”
4. Disparaging first responders, and council colleagues by accusing them of impropriety and
corruption because labor organizations chose not to support her or her cronies. These unfair
and baseless allegations contribute to loss of public trust in our law enforcement and public
safety agencies, and cause meaningless conflict based on false statements made for political
gain.
5. Making unfounded accusations of sexism and sexual harassment against councilmembers and
staff whenever disagreements arise to deflect argument against her ill-conceived and
unfounded positions on substantive issues. This conduct is a transparent attempt to deflect
responsibility for the Mayor’s bizarre and illogical statements
6. Discouraging public participation by mocking and belittling constituents, including elderly
residents, by implying their incompetence and deafness, simply because they were politically
adversarial to her and her cronies or expressed a conflicting viewpoint, attempting to intimidate
opposing viewpoints and to squelch dissent.
7. Misusing council procedures and engaging in “ambush techniques” by failing to place items on
the Council agenda in order to surprise her fellow councilmembers and city staff, and failing to
consult department heads before raising issues that could have been resolved administratively,
for the purpose of embarrassing unprepared city staff members and undermining public
confidence in these officials and staffers. The Mayor has also misstated historical Council
records to attempt infer that the city staff and Council has been malfeasant.
8. Engaging in un-collegial behavior, unprofessional temperament, and unfounded accusations
against councilmembers simply because other councilmembers expressed a differing viewpoint.
This behavior subverts the public decision making process. By deflecting the argument and
attempting to silence dissent and statements of other councilmembers to avoid being
demonstrated wrong, the Mayor seeks to use intimidation, strong arm tactics, and fear-
mongering in place of reasoned decision making.
9. Relying on ChatGPT to conduct City Council meetings, thereby abdicating her responsibility to
exercise independent judgment as presiding officer and maintain control over city business by
personal judgment and not mere computer manipulation. The Mayor admits uses these
processes, self-allegedly, to make her statements, but calls to question her understanding of the
statements themselves.
10. Abdicating her sworn elected responsibilities and duties by being manipulated and controlled
by third party unelected persons, and concealing and denying that conduct and practice,
informing city staff that April Verlato must accompany her to all events, and by politicizing
Coffee With the Mayor to malign other councilmembers and give Ms. Verlato a platform to air
her grievances, rather than conduct the actual business of the Office of the Mayor.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED,
That the City Council of the City of Arcadia formally censures Mayor Sharon Kwan for conduct
unbecoming of her office, which has undermined the trust, respect, and effective governance owed to
Attachment No. 3
Exhibit “A”
the residents of this City, and brought opprobrium and embarrassment to the City and City Council by
reason of this misconduct; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED,
That the City Council expects all its members, including the Mayor, to:
• Treat colleagues, staff, and the public with respect and civility;
• Base public statements on facts and verified information;
• Abide by the requirements of the Brown Act and the City’s rules of procedure;
• Work collaboratively and in good faith with staff and Council colleagues;
• Uphold the dignity of the office to which they were elected.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED,
• The Mayor’s duties as presiding officer of the City Council are hereby terminated for the
balance of her current Mayoral term;
• The Mayor is relieved of her duties to chair or run City Council meetings for the balance of her
Mayoral term;
• The Mayor shall not address City functions in the capacity of Mayor for the balance of her
Mayoral term;
• The Mayor is relieved of her committee assignments for the balance of her Mayoral term.
BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED,
That this Resolution be entered into the official record of the City Council and communicated publicly to
reaffirm the City Council’s commitment to respectful, transparent, and effective governance.
RESOLUTION NO. 7463
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AR CADIA
ESTABLISHING THE ROTATION FOR THE MAYOR AND MAYOR PRO
TEMPORE
WHEREAS, Section 404 of the Charter of the City of Arcadia currently requires the
City Council to select a Mayor and Mayor Pro Tempore annually by majority vote of the
City Council; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution No. 7451, the City Council has proposed an
amendment to the City Charter, which the City's voters may adopt by approving Measure
CA at the November 8, 2022, election; and
WHEREAS, if adopted by the voters, the amendment will modify Section 404 of
the Charter to require that the offices of Mayor and Mayor Pro Tempore shall be filled
automatically by rotation among the Councilmembers with each serving a term of
approximately nine (9) and one-half (1/2) months; and
WHEREAS, if adopted by the voters, the amendment to Section 404 will direct the
City Council to establish implementing procedures to enable the automatic rotation of
offices; and
WHEREAS, in anticipation of the voters potentially approving Measure CA, the
City Council now desires to establish procedures to implement the revised Section 404
so that the Mayoral rotation will be in place when the new City Council is seated; and
WHEREAS, the revised Section 404 delegates the responsibility to the City
Council to determine appropriate implementing procedures for Mayoral rotation, which
includes the power to consider such matters as the order of rotation, procedures for
resignation or vacancy, and grounds for removal; and
1
Attachment No. 4
5