An attempt to gather enough signatures to force a recall vote for Arcadia City Councilman David Fu has failed, recall organizers announced Wednesday.
After weeks of voter canvassing throughout Council District 1, recall supporters fell short of the 1,600 signatures needed for a place on the ballot, according to organizers. The effort garnered 1,450 signatures, Councilwoman Sharon Kwan said.
“In the process of gathering signatures, our team connected with a large number of District 1 voters and heard widespread concerns about accountability, transparency, and leadership,” according to April Verlato, who led the recall effort and represented CD1 from 2016-24. “Many residents also expressed fear of retaliation if they signed the petition. The fact that so many people still chose to engage with us — despite those fears — speaks volumes about the depth of discontent in the district.”
Fu did not respond to a request for comment.
In a rebuttal to the recall notice, he called the effort “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.”
Recall supporters launched the signature drive after Fu led a council censure action against then-Mayor Sharon Kwan.
“My job is to do the right thing for Arcadia,” Fu wrote in his rebuttal. “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,” according to Fu.
Deputy City Manager Justine Bruno confirmed that the deadline to submit the recall petition elapsed on Wednesday and the recall process has concluded.
She added that the City Manager’s Office “treats allegations of intimidation seriously. We have no written or verbal reports indicating that any District 1 voters feared retaliation for signing the recall petition,” Bruno wrote in an email to HeySoCal.com. “Had a petition been submitted, all voter information and signatures would be confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable elections and public records laws. Such information would only be accessible by the City Clerk’s Office and the City Attorney’s Office, and not to Council Member Fu or any other external parties.”
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 filed in November.
In a mass email Wednesday, Verlato said recall supporters hope that voters remember the alleged fear of reprisals when Fu runs for reelection.
“We don’t want a representative that we can’t trust and who is willing to put the unions’ money grab before the residents who live here and pay the taxes that fund those unions’ salaries,” Verlato wrote.
Fu was elected to a four-year term in November 2024. Arcadia council members can serve for a maximum of two terms in office.
The total number of signatures gathered since last fall was unclear.
At the Aug. 19 council meeting, Fu initiated efforts to censure and remove Kwan.
According to recall proponents, the next day Kwan was scheduled to meet with an investigator regarding a sexual harassment complaint she filed against Fu.
“The timing raises serious concerns of retaliation and abuse of power,” the notice document states.
An independent investigation firm contracted by the city found none of Kwan’s harassment allegations were sustained, according to Fu at the March 3 council meeting.
“I want to be very clear. An investigation result does not always reflect what actually happened,” Kwan said in an email to HeySoCal.com. “In situations like this, especially involving sexual harassment, the truth is often only known by two people, the person who did it and the person who experienced it.
“Women rarely get full justice in these situations. And in many cases, the person responsible is not held accountable. That is not because nothing happened. It is because these cases are difficult to prove within a system that relies heavily on witnesses and third party accounts.”
Kwan said investigators relied heavily on interviews they conducted “with people within Councilman Fu’s circle, his colleagues and those close to him. That raises serious concerns about objectivity,” the District 2 councilwoman said.
I spent hours sharing my experience in detail. I know what I experienced, and I stand by it.
After I filed the complaint, what followed was retaliation. The pattern was clear. Instead of addressing the behavior, there was defensiveness, hostility, and repeated efforts to undermine my credibility.
During public comment, residents raised concerns about his personal history, and he himself stated publicly that he is on his third marriage. I did not introduce that. It was already part of the public record.
Hearing those comments, and seeing the intensity of his reaction, it became clear to me that this situation struck a nerve.
The response was not professional. It was personal. And when a public official responds that way, it raises serious concerns about judgment and leadership.
Kwan added, “In speaking with many residents, especially within the Asian community, I heard a consistent concern. Many have shared with me that they are afraid of retaliation and do not feel safe speaking out publicly.
“In our culture, people are often taught to endure, to stay quiet, and to avoid conflict, especially when there is fear of consequences. That silence should not be mistaken for support. It is often fear.
“That fear is real. I am experiencing it myself,” Kwan said. “That is what I have heard directly from residents, and it is something we should take seriously.”
Residents seeking Fu’s removal contend he “brought accusations against the Mayor despite no proof and no public demand for a censure.”
Fu along with councilmen Paul Cheng and Dr. Michael Cao then called for a special meeting on Aug. 26, which recall proponents say suggests possible Brown Act violations. The state’s Brown Act prohibits officials from making decisions outside a public hearing.
“These actions undermine transparency and public trust,” according to the recall notice.
“Fu also attempted to remove the Mayor from office despite being advised by legal counsel that such action is prohibited under the Arcadia City Charter,” recall proponents argued. “Residents are now suing the city to overturn his attempt, which could cost taxpayers significantly.
“His actions diverted staff time, delayed city business, exposed the city to litigation, and reflect fiscally reckless behavior that harms residents,” the notice concluded. “This conduct creates division and erodes confidence in local government.”
Council members Eileen Wang, Cao and Cheng did not respond to requests for comment on the recall’s end.
Video of Arcadia city council meetings are available on the city’s website via tinyurl.com/sr9nedyh.
Updated March 19, 2026, 1:36 p.m.
