San Leandro council votes to release HR investigation report after public pressure; debate over redactions and costs
Loading...
Summary
After extensive public comment and debate, the San Leandro City Council voted to release an independent investigative report tied to a complaint by Vice Mayor Bowen, to post a summary of workplace-investigation costs, and to agendize restorative-justice discussion; council discussion included legal authority, redactions, cost figures and process concerns.
The San Leandro City Council voted to make public an independent investigation report tied to Vice Mayor Bowen’s complaint and to post an associated summary of workplace-investigation costs, following multiple public speakers who urged transparency. The council also voted to agendize a discussion about restorative justice mediation for the council.
City Attorney Rich Pierrette told the council that the body — as the holder of attorney-client privilege — may waive that privilege under California Evidence Code section 954 and specified options for scope and redactions. Pierrette said any waiver would apply only to the specific investigation report and potential exhibits prepared by HR Law Consultants.
Public commenters repeatedly urged release so the community could participate meaningfully in the disciplinary process. Sarah Bailey said the public had not seen the investigative report and asked the council to “release the redacted report so the public knows what's going on during the disciplinary hearing coming up.” Deborah Acosta of the League of San Leandro Voters cited Administrative Code 1.13.0.115 and said public discipline must be based on factual allegations with meaningful comment available to the public.
Councilmember Simon, who had initially described concerns about confidentiality in employee investigations, ultimately moved that the council: (1) release the full unredacted investigative report (dated 10/31/2025) and exhibits, (2) make the summary of workplace investigations available on the City Clerk’s website, and (3) agendize a discussion about restorative justice mediation. The city attorney and HR Director Emily Hong clarified that the workplace-investigations summary is already a public record and that the council had previously authorized procurement of independent investigators and the scope of work.
Cost figures were discussed during deliberations. Councilmember Simon stated the investigator invoice for the current matter was $135,000 (noting that staff time and other costs were additional) and requested the city publish a summary of investigation counts and costs from 2019 to present. HR Director Emily Hong explained that the presented spreadsheet counts complaints and that some rows represent separate investigations; where one investigator covered multiple complaints in a single contract, the entry reflected that coverage.
After procedural debate about voting the three requests as a package versus separately, the council took a vote. The clerk initially announced the motion carried with five yes votes and two no votes, identifying Mayor Gonzalez and Vice Mayor Walton as having voted no; the transcript also contains a later, conflicting statement that the motion carried unanimously. The council directed that, if privilege is waived, the report and any exhibits designated in the motion be posted to the City Clerk’s “items of interest” public records page, with redactions handled consistent with legal guidance.
The disciplinary hearing referenced by council members is scheduled for January 20; the council indicated the record would be used in that process. Councilmembers also discussed possible restorative-justice mediation for improving council dynamics, and the council accepted a motion to place that discussion on a future agenda.
