San Mateo council issuing apology

“Mayor Lee is a friend of mine, but she is wrong in this, and I think we need to move forward,” Councilmember Rich Hedges said in his explanation for approval of the letter at the June 5 council meeting.

The council is hoping to repair relationships following the contentious meeting when Lee made allegations of potential vote trading and Brown Act violations regarding the vacant mayor seat. Lee said she received vote-trading proposals to become mayor in exchange for voting for Robbins to fill the vacant council seat left after Papan was elected to the state Assembly. She named Robbins as the person suggested to her by pulling out a manila envelope she had at the Dec. 12 meeting and opening it to reveal a piece of paper with his name, later saying she had a duty to let the public know about the conversations. The manila envelope incident occurred after then-Councilmember Lisa Diaz Nash and Councilmember Robert Newsom declined to vote to make Lee the mayor on Dec. 5, usually a ceremonial decision, citing a desire to see the vacant council seat filled first on Dec. 12 so all five people could appoint the mayor. The decision led to a week without a mayor for the city and uncertainty, given there were only four councilmembers and no majority. The council eventually appointed Hedges and named Lee the mayor.

The allegations led the City Attorney’s Office to refer the matter to the San Mateo County District Attorney’s Office. A monthslong investigation led to the DA’s Office concluding there was no evidence to support the allegations, leading the council to believe an apology was in order from the body given the unwarranted harm to the four. The council said it was in the city’s best interest to put the matter behind it and to ensure there was no chilling effect on individuals having the right to address their elected officials and advocate for a position freely.

A subcommittee of Diaz Nash and Councilmember Adam Loraine drafted the letter following direction from the council at its May 1 meeting. However, Loraine asked at the June 5 meeting that the item be delayed at least one council meeting so the subcommittee could meet and work on letter language, citing his concern that the letter was too punitive to Lee. The council decided against his request, citing the need to move on from the situation.

“I don’t want to bring this up again and have it come in front of the council in another month or two months. I think it’s time we peel the bandage off, make the apology and move on,” Newsom said.

Seema Patel, a planning commissioner with the city who was speaking on her own behalf, agreed with Loraine and asked for the city to revise the letter, given that the division was not just caused by one person. She questioned why disregarding the city charter and filibustering the vote for mayor didn’t warrant an apology from others on the council.

“Given that a majority of council supported a broad apology, I was expecting the apology letter to cover the entire series of events and not target a single individual,” Patel said.

The council voted 4-0 to approve sending the apology letter at the meeting, with Lee not in attendance. Robbins and Fernandez spoke and argued the letter, as initially written, was a necessary and needed apology, noting they hoped to hear it directly from Lee.

“It is my view that the City Council should act,” Robbins said. “I would appreciate it. It would certainly make me feel better as I move beyond this.”

“For the closure I need personally, and the time I have invested in this community and having my character questioned for two months and being investigated by the district attorney for approximately two months, I would like the council to act tonight,” Fernandez said.

The council also plans to strengthen its code of conduct to increase clarity, accountability and consequences for potential future deviations.