Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Ethics Recalls topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents urge Montclair councilmember Ben Lopez to resign after speakers cite court finding, announce recall effort
Summary
Multiple residents addressed the Montclair City Council calling for Councilmember Ben Lopez to step down after speakers said a court found him liable for sexual harassment and related claims; speakers announced a recall campaign and urged the council to strengthen bylaws.
Get email alerts on the Ethics Recalls topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Several residents told the Montclair City Council on Tuesday that Councilmember Ben Lopez should resign following what speakers described as a court finding of liability for sexual harassment and related claims.
"If you think this will just blow over, you are mistaken," Alice Garcia told the council, saying she and neighborhood residents would make the details public and that a recall process had been launched. Garcia urged the council to amend its bylaws to ensure zero tolerance for harassment and invoked California's Fair Employment and Housing Act in urging stronger workplace protections.
Edwin Garcia Sr., a 25-year resident, veteran and youth coach, said he was speaking "directly to you, Ben Lopez," and told the council that "the court of law has found you liable for sexual harassment, oppression, malice, and fraud." Garcia said the community would pursue lawful, peaceful action, including a recall, if Lopez did not resign.
Bruce Culp, another resident, described the speakers as a "model family" and said the city should be transparent about legal and administrative costs related to the matter. "You need to resign," Culp said, adding that continued special meetings and legal actions were increasing costs for taxpayers.
The meeting record shows multiple public commenters made similar calls for accountability and for the council to adopt clearer anti-harassment rules; speakers said they had served notice of intention to recall Lopez.
The council did not act on the recall during the meeting. The city attorney asked the council to meet in closed session to discuss pending litigation, including two cases identified in the record as "Fuentes Garcia versus Lopez" and "Ibanas versus Montlair," and the meeting proceeded into closed session without a public vote on the recall or immediate disciplinary action.
The public comments period provided no formal finding by the council; council members who spoke during the meeting offered condolences on unrelated matters but did not make a decision on the recall or Lopez's status during the open session. The next procedural step recorded in the meeting was the council's adjournment into closed session to consider the attorney-identified litigation items.

