Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Censure Investigation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Santa Ana council orders outside investigation after officersfile complaints against Councilmember Hernandez
Summary
The City Council voted 4-2 on Oct. 7 to direct staff to hire an outside investigator and return with results at the first meeting in January after three Santa Ana police officers filed complaints alleging misconduct by Councilmember Jonathan Hernandez. Hernandez recused himself from the vote and denied wrongdoing at the podium.
The Santa Ana City Council on Oct. 7 agreed to open a formal, independent investigation into complaints filed by three Santa Ana police officers against Councilmember Jonathan Hernandez, voting 4-2 to direct staff to retain an outside investigator and return the report at the councilmeeting in early January.
Hernandez addressed the council before the vote, defending his public criticism of police actions and saying his remarks are protected political speech. The city attorney told the council that human resources had already processed personnel complaints internally but that the council retains a separate role under the citycharter to consider ethics-related actions and possible censure. The attorney advised the council on options including appointing an ad hoc committee or engaging outside counsel.
Council members who supported pursuing an independent probe said due process for both officers and the councilmember is essential and that an outside review would help the city resolve competing accounts and manage legal risk. Councilmember Penalosa and Mayor Pro Tem Vasquez both voiced concern about protecting staff and avoiding possible costly litigation; several councilmembers said they would support whatever the investigator found. Hernandez recused himself from the vote.
The motion, made by Mayor Meskwah and seconded by Councilmember Fan, carried 4 ayes (Becerra, Penalosa, Fan, Mayor Meskwah) and 2 nays (Lopez, Mayor Pro Tem Vasquez). The council directed staff to contract for an independent investigation and return findings at the first council meeting in January.
Why it matters: The decision formalizes a public process separate from the internal HR review and makes an independent record that the council can act on publicly. Council members framed the move as both a protection for city employees and a way to preserve the constitutional and procedural rights of an elected official.
What council directed: Staff were instructed to secure an independent investigator, coordinate with HR and the city attorney to preserve confidentiality where required, and provide a written report and recommendations at the council's first January meeting. The city attorney said the council must be specific about alleged ethics-code violations if it wants a draft censure resolution returned for consideration.
Public comment and context: The item drew sustained public comment both for and against Hernandez. Some speakers urged the council to protect free speech and accused the police association of political influence; others urged due process for city employees and warned of legal exposure. City staff reiterated that internal processes for harassment and retaliation complaints continued concurrently.
Next steps: Staff will begin the procurement process to hire an independent investigator; the council asked that the final product be publicly presented at the first meeting in January so members and the public can consider next steps, which may include a resolution of censure or no further action.
