In response to a recall campaign calling for his ouster, Arcadia City Councilman David Fu defended the censure action he led against Mayor Sharon Kwan and questioned the motives of recall supporters.
Fu filed this rebuttal to the recall Nov. 23, following the campaign’s launch earlier that month:
“As your councilmember, my job is to do the right thing for Arcadia. In this case, the right thing was to reprimand unprofessional, dishonest behavior by the Mayor. That’s what a censure is: a reprimand for unacceptable conduct.
“The public overwhelmingly supported the censure, as did every member of the council except the Mayor.
“Because Arcadia deserves the best.
“Now, a few people want to punish me for doing the right thing.
“Honesty, principle, respect for law: these are the reasons why you chose me to represent you. That’s also why your police and firefighters endorsed my campaign, and oppose this recall.
“This recall is a third fabricated attempt by a former councilmember who desperately wants to regain power. It’s a cynical effort to undo the results of a fair election just one year ago. Please watch the August 26 City Council meeting online and see for yourself.
“This recall is nothing but lies and misrepresentation. The fake recall election will waste up to $250,000; enough to hire another police officer AND firefighter.
“Arcadia is safe, our budget is balanced, and finally, our meetings are run efficiently and professionally. Help me continue to protect Arcadia. Say no to recall,” Fu wrote.
The former mayor and council member to whom Fu referred is April Verlato. In a mass email sent last week, Verlato challenged Fu’s assertions.
“David Fu claims to have done the right thing. However, what he is accused of was acting inappropriate towards a colleague on City Council and then retaliating against her when she reported it,” Verlato wrote. “That’s not the right thing by anyone’s definition.”
The recall’s draft petition is awaiting approval form the city and county to start collecting required 1,600-plus signatures within 90 days.
Recall proponents say their effort stems from Fu’s alleged “pattern of retaliation, misuse of authority, fiscal recklessness, and disregard for the City Charter,” according to the campaign’s notice of intent.
According to Verlato, Fu’s recall response avoided “responding to the subject of trying to remove the Mayor from her position and how that stance was in direct conflict with the City Charter.”
Verlato also challenged the level of opposition to the recall that Fu mentioned in his formal response and alluded to former Mayor and Councilman Sho Tay’s alleged role in the censure effort.
“He had to campaign for support and former councilmember Sho Tay had to post in all his WeChat rooms slanderous remarks about the Mayor in order to get the handful of people to come out and claim to want to remove Mayor Kwan,” Verlato wrote. “No one came to a council meeting or wrote an email demanding the removal of Mayor Kwan prior to Councilman David Fu bringing the motion for it.”
On Fu’s union support, Verlato wrote, “Councilman Fu wants to play up the support he has of the unions, the same unions that jockeyed and campaigned for a pay raise that resulted in a 20% increase in employee costs in the first year of the new contract. Mayor Kwan and I voted against these contracts in 2024 because they resulted in a deficit budget.
“He claims in his letter that the recall will cost $250,000,” Verlato continued. “However, the City Manager told City Council if the recall is added to the June 2026 primary, it will only cost approximately $50,000.
“And if the City budget was truly balanced and there was enough money, Council could already vote to add sworn officer positions,” Verlato wrote.
City Manager Dominic Lazzaretto said Verlato “is quoting me using outdated information” and Fu’s $250,000 estimate “is more accurate.”
In an email to HeySoCal.com, Lazzaretto said, “I sent the Council a description of the recall process when the first notice was filed. In that, I said that we had asked the County for a quote, but in the meantime I would estimate that a stand alone election could cost upwards of $50,000, with a combined election costing less.
“The next week, we received the estimate from the County elections officials, who said a stand alone election would cost ‘at least’ $250,000,” Lazzaretto said. “We sent that to the Council as well. The $250,000 if the most up-to-date estimate.”
Fu is a first-term council member elected in November 2024 and represents Council District 1. The district extends northward from Duarte Road into hillside communities above Foothill Boulevard, with Santa Anita and North Fifth avenues serving as western and eastern borders.
Updated Dec. 30, 2025, 11:32 a.m.
