Jurupa Valley meeting draws public criticism and defenses over conduct of councilmember Armando Carmona

Multiple speakers used the public-comment period at the March 6 Jurupa Valley City Council meeting to criticize Councilmember Armando Carmona’s conduct, while several other residents defended him and urged unity.

Kim Jarrell Johnson, a Jurupa Valley resident, opened public comment saying she was “speaking as a private citizen and a resident” and urged the council to speak up about what she called bullying by Carmona when he praised newly elected Councilmember Veronica Sanchez by denigrating former councilmember Leslie Altamirano.

Dr. Veronica Contreras, identified in the meeting as a physician and Jurupa Valley resident, told the council she had “deep concern regarding the ongoing pattern of hostility, intimidation, and unethical behavior” she attributes to Carmona. She said Carmona’s previous comment referring to a former member as “a cancer” was particularly offensive because the former member’s child was battling cancer and the member had recently lost a parent. Contreras urged the council to “implement measures to prevent the misuse of the dais for personal attacks,” to investigate harassment claims and to consider consequences for misconduct, and she called for Carmona’s resignation.

Dr. Irene Sanchez Diaz described a long personal history with Carmona and said his behavior has been “opportunistic” and divisive; she asked for transparency about campaign activity and local groups that have distributed flyers supporting particular candidates. Other speakers — including Veronica Hartado and Robert Ramirez — defended Carmona as someone who has helped local businesses and community members, said the allegations were politically motivated, and urged the council to focus on unity and city services.

Several other residents — Jesse Silva, Daniel Silvis and Santiago Marin among them — urged civility and cooperation, with comments ranging from praise for councilmembers’ emergency response work to offers of help on vendor and neighborhood events. Council members and staff did not respond substantively during public comment, consistent with council rules for non-agendized items, but the volume and tenor of remarks underscored divisions among residents about conduct and local political organizing.

Speakers called for different remedies: some asked the council to publicly condemn personal attacks and implement a code of conduct; others asked residents to work together and emphasized Carmona’s community service. The council did not take immediate disciplinary action on the dais during the meeting.