Stockton council adopts censure of Councilmember Padilla after public hearing

The Stockton City Council on Nov. 12 adopted a censure resolution against Councilmember Michelle Padilla after a public hearing in which staff said the ad hoc committee found evidence that taxpayer funds were used at an event that became political in nature. The motion passed 5‑0 with Mayor Lincoln absent.

City Clerk staff summarized the ad hoc committee’s findings, saying the committee concluded that several candidates spoke at the event, at least one speaker encouraged votes for another candidate, one speaker referenced creating a majority voting block and that Councilmember Padilla and at least one speaker wore campaign‑style shirts. The report advised the council that a censure resolution requires adoption of findings by at least four affirmative votes.

Padilla, given an opportunity to respond, said the gathering was “a community event” and repeatedly denied any intent to promote candidates or misuse taxpayer funds. “I had no intention, no emotive motivation. There was no promotion, no endorsement, no ask of political activity for any specific candidate,” she told the council. Padilla said she wore a shirt that identified her as a councilmember and argued it did not contain words such as “vote” or “elect.”

Members who supported the resolution framed the action as enforcement of council policy rather than a personal attack. “It’s not against you,” one member said during deliberations, “but if we let every councilmember use discretionary funds for political purposes it sets a bad precedent.” Another councilmember cited circulating video evidence and constituent complaints as the basis for taking action.

Public comment ahead of the council vote was sharply divided. Several residents and former officials urged restraint and due process, arguing the ad hoc process relied on hearsay and media reports; others, including a former councilmember, urged the council to pursue formal remedies or refer the matter to outside authorities. Supporters of Padilla described the event as open to the public and said the appearance of candidates on stage was not coordinated by Padilla.

After the public comment period and council discussion, the council adopted the resolution as recommended by the censure ad hoc committee. The adopted resolution formalizes the council’s finding that a serious violation of council policy occurred, and the censured member is to be removed from deliberations on the item after the public hearing and the vote had been taken. The council did not impose fines or removal; the policy outlines censure as a formal expression of disapproval.