By Brett Callwood
Council Member Wanda Love was formally censured at the City Council meeting on the evening of Tuesday, January 28 after an external investigation concluded that she acted inappropriately towards two unnamed staff members.
Details of the investigation became known at the council meeting on Tuesday, January 14 when, following closed session, City Attorney Carmen Vasquez read a staff report stating that the City had retained attorney Jeff Love to investigate concerns regarding the conduct of Council Member Wanda Love towards two City employees. This investigation aimed to determine whether Council Member Love’s action constituted inappropriate behavior, and considered findings from a prior inquiry involving one of the employees.
“The investigation substantiated allegations that Council Member Love unfairly criticized employee one in connection with two City projects – The Willows Wetland Grant Project, and the demolition of the Chase Bank building,” the report stated. It later continued, “The investigation also substantiated allegations regarding Council Member Love’s conduct towards employee number two during a City event.”
Speaking to the GVN, Love said that the accusations are, “definitely inaccurate.” At the January 28 meeting, Love mentioned that her character was “under attack.”
A staff note for the Resolution, number 6692, stated, “That the intent and purpose of this Censure Resolution is to express the City Council’s opinion that Council Member Wanda Love engaged in unprofessional behavior toward certain City employees and it is not to be interpreted as a formal legal finding.”
Love will have to complete three training sessions within 90 days of this resolution. While the censure doesn’t remove Love from her elected position, it does restrict her ability to perform her duties, due to the following sections on the document:
“That Council Member Wanda Love, in her official capacity as a council member shall refrain from communicating with City staff, with the exception of the City Manager, City Attorney, and Deputy City Clerk. Communications with the City Manager and Deputy City Clerk shall be in writing, with the exception of during open and closed session city council meetings. This action shall remain in place until a majority of the Council rescinds it;
“That Council Member Wanda Love is suspended from her duties as a city council representative or alternate representative on outside and city committees. This action shall remain in place until a majority of the Council rescinds it;
“That Council Member Wanda Love is prohibited from city-paid travel, inclusive of registration fees, to conferences, meetings, trainings and other events where representation of the City is involved. This action shall remain in place until a majority of the Council rescinds it.”
The resolution passed 3-2, with Mayor Tasha Cerda, Mayor Pro Tem Rodney Tanaka and Council Member Mark Henderson voting in favor. Love and Council Member Paulette Francis voted against, with Francis raising concerns about the broad nature of the accusations, and freedom of speech. Love maintained her innocence.
The resolution is effective immediately.
Council Member Love sent the GVN the following letter:
I am writing to express my formal and unequivocal disagreement with the closed session report read during the Jan. 14, 2025 Gardena City Council meeting and the subsequent passage of Resolution No. 6692 at the Jan. 28, 2025 council meeting. The actions taken by Mayor Tasha Cerda, Councilmember Rodney Tanaka, and Councilmember Mark Henderson amount to targeted harassment, aimed at censoring me without affording me the due process to challenge accusations made against me.
The sanctions imposed—including stripping me of all city representation, denying city-funded travel, barring me from oral and email communication with city directors and staff, and mandating three days of training—are excessive and punitive. The claims and intent outlined in the resolution are baseless, procedurally flawed, and fundamentally unjust.
The accusations against me rely on an investigative report by Attorney Jeffrey Love, which lacks publicly verifiable evidence and transparency. The vague allegations of “unfounded criticisms and targeting” are unsupported by specific examples, making them impossible to meaningfully dispute.
Moreover, the investigative process raises serious concerns regarding impartiality and fairness, appearing to reflect subjective conclusions rather than an objective assessment of facts. Most troubling is the blatant violation of my due process rights.
I was not given a fair opportunity to review the evidence, confront my accusers statements, or adequately defend myself. This resolution disregards fundamental principles of fairness and justice.
Additionally, the vague language used in the resolution—such as “unprofessional behavior” and “unnecessary strain”—lacks clear definitions and invites subjective interpretation and misuse.
By moving forward with this censure, the Mayor and Councilmembers Tanaka and Henderson have directly impeded my ability to perform my elected duties, including oversight, transparency, and the right to freely express concerns. The democratic principles of open debate and dissent are being undermined. My criticisms of city staff, which fall within my responsibilities as an elected official, were not rude or disrespectful and should not be weaponized as grounds for punitive action.
The sanctions outlined in Resolution 6692—including restrictions on communication, removal from committees, and prohibition from city-funded travel—are excessive and unjustly hinder my ability to serve my constituents effectively. This censure appears to be a retaliatory effort to silence my voice rather than address legitimate concerns.
A fairer and more constructive resolution should have been sought. Mediation facilitated by the city manager could have been a reasonable step to address concerns and rebuild professional relationships. Furthermore, clear guidelines should be established regarding interactions between council members and city staff to prevent future conflicts.
In conclusion, I strongly contest the claims, accusations, and passage of Resolution No. 6692. This resolution infringes upon my rights as a council member and threatens democratic governance and my ability to do my council duties in our city. I regret that the mayor and councilmen chose to proceed with this punitive measure rather than prioritize fairness, transparency, and unity.
— Councilwoman Wanda Love,
City of Gardena
