What’s the matter with Cypress? And why should you give a damn ...

Last night's city council meeting was special. But not in a particularly good or reassuring way.

By Stephanie Wade/Contributor

Last night, Cypress held a special city council meeting to “consider directing the City Attorney to provide the City Council” with a “full report” on how the city had handled allegations against City Manager Peter Grant. The meeting was so inconclusive that Mayor David Burke quipped it deserved a satirical headline in The Onion: “City Council Votes to Hide Information . . . from Itself!” It’s a small civil war in a small part of our county, but one that echoes in every one of our cities. We don’t know who will prevail in Cypress, but understanding what’s happening there may tell us a lot about where all our cities and our county government are headed.

I’ll say at the outset that I am not an unbiased observer. I have watched with growing concern as one layer of Cypress governance is peeled back after another, like an onion that’s making me cry instead of laugh. Nevertheless, I’ll try to fairly represent the arguments made by each side because we still don’t have all the facts, and I want people to have the information they need to make up their own minds when all those facts come in.

How We Got Here

The proximate cause for the special meeting was a bombshell dropped by a former city employee during public comment at the April 28 council meeting. Doug Dancs had been employed by the city for 32 years, including 23 years as the head of the Public Works Department. He said he came to the lectern because he was angry that the city had honored City Manager Peter Grant. Dancs alleged that Grant was guilty of illegal activities and, in Dancs’ view, Grant deserved to be “fired for cause.” The allegation was concerning to many residents and at least one former city council member, Frances Marquez. Until Dancs spoke out, none of them knew about the separation agreement or the allegations he had made against the city manager. Marquez served on the council from December 2020 until December of last year, so she was serving when Dancs negotiated that agreement but knew nothing about it. Marquez is adamant she had been told nothing. She only learned that Dancs had received a $183,000 settlement and that the city had paid another hundred thousand dollars in legal fees when she read about it in the Daily Pilot two days later.

The allegations against Grant and the previously undisclosed settlement were the subject of extensive public comment at the next regular council meeting on May 12. Several residents turned up to defend the honor and reputation of City Manager Grant and to side with the council’s two Republicans, Scott Minikus and Bonnie Peat. They maintained, first, that the matter had been fairly handled; second, that further discussion would expose the city to potential litigation; and third, that all calls for investigation or transparency were wholly manufactured by Mayor Burke in an effort to divide the community and build his political reputation. Meanwhile, at least as many residents, including former council member Marquez, demanded an investigation and public explanation.

Burke asked twice for all investigation documents related to Dancs, and the city attorney would not turn over the documents. The city had paid over $100,000 to Leibert, Cassidy and Whitmore for the investigation. The employee was paid $183,000 Mayor Burke then asked City Attorney Fred Galante to provide the council with a summary report on the settlement agreement with Dancs and how the allegations against Mr. Grant had been handled. However, Galante twice refused, saying he didn’t “have the authority to release such a report.” Mayor Burke attempted to resolve the impasse by calling a special meeting to consider a resolution compelling the city attorney to provide a report. Even this proved controversial, with Peat and Minikus stating they would refuse to participate in any meeting discussing an issue they claimed was too confidential and legally sensitive to be discussed publicly. Democrat Kyle Chang sided with Mayor Burke, but newly elected council member and Mayor Pro Tempore Leo Medrano did not join his fellow Democrats, stating he wasn’t sure what the best course was but thought it was best to move slowly.

With Peat, Minikus, and Medrano all voicing opposition to a special meeting, the city attorney argued that the opposition of three council members negated the mayor’s authority to call the meeting. Burke held his ground, demanding to see any part of the city charter or legal code that restricted his authority to call the meeting. At this point, Galante finally relented. However, with Peat and Minikus saying they would not attend and Medrano implying he would do the same, it seemed unlikely that Burke would achieve a quorum to consider his resolution.

Tonight’s Meeting—A Tale of Lost Opportunity?

In the end, Mayor Burke had a quorum, not because Medrano joined the meeting, but because Peat and Minikus—who had been opposed to holding and previously said they wouldn’t attend—actually showed up. Public comment on the matter was, again, extensive and heated. Nineteen speakers were heard. Six of them spoke in support of City Manager Grant and against any further investigation or reporting to the city council. Most of these Grant supporters talked at length about the city being incredibly well-run and against what they claimed were Mayor Burke’s divisive tactics, which they believed would leave the city in some unexplained legal jeopardy.

Much of this seemed to be a distraction. Former Council Member John Peat, Council Member Bonnie Peat’s husband, claimed that Mayor Burke had manufactured the crisis for some unexplained political benefit and decried what he saw as an unfair attempt to impugn the reputation of the city manager. He claimed that it was Grant’s “impeccable leadership” that made Cypress the envy of other cities, with budget surpluses, a growing business sector, and what he said were “the finest roads in Orange County.” Brooke Nafarette railed against Mayor Burke’s “agenda” without explaining what that agenda was, while also criticizing his recent vote against a 32 million dollar park.. Nafarette, along with Colleen Edwards and a woman who identified herself as Kelly K., carried the same theme about Grant’s “impeccable leadership,” the success of the city, and that Mayor Burke’s actions were, in Kelly K.’s words, “disgusting and disgraceful.” These arguments seemed to be red herrings: whether or not Peter Grant is a nice guy and, as some seemed to argue, almost solely responsible for everything good in Cypress was beside the point. The point was the council asking for confirmation that personnel and financial matters were legally and ethically addressed, and seeking clarification on why at least one member of the old council was never informed about the allegations, the investigations, or the expensive settlement agreement. The only logical, germane arguments against Burke’s efforts at transparency came from Kelly K., who alluded to the confidentiality and legal risks of delving into matters she thought were privileged; and from former council member Ann Mallari, who referred to a September 23, 2024, closed session meeting and claimed that all council members, including David Burke, attended and were fully apprised of the actions surrounding Grant and the Dancs settlement.

In contrast, those who came out to support Burke’s effort were far less prone to invective and far clearer in their arguments. Resident Paul Kokkinos complained that he and others were being “vilified” and attacked for simply asking questions about what he now believed was a “cover-up.” Dr. Malini Nagpal, a plaintiff in the city’s redistricting lawsuit,said she “fully supports an investigation” but shared concerns similar to Paul’s. Malini specifically asked Councilmember Minikus to “please keep civility in mind . . . practice emotional regulation” and limit his “emotional, incoherent outbursts” that undermine his ability to lead. David Avila, described himself as a longtime resident and said he had always been proud that Cypress was a quiet city, rarely in the news for anything negative. However, he noted,that this scandal had changed that, a situation that would only be resolved through a thorough investigation. Katie Shapiro, a plaintiff in the redistricting lawsuit, argued that the real litigation liability arose from the city’s apparent desire to cover up something, especially if the allegations of illegal activity by the city manager turned out to be credible. She demanded an immediate investigation by an independent investigator, asked that Grant be put on administrative leave until that investigation was submitted to the council, and urged the council to implement strong whistleblower protections.

The most powerful argument of the night came from former council member Frances Marquez. While looking her former colleagues Peat and Minikus in the eye, she stated, “I knew nothing about [the Dancs Separation] agreement,” and it was “clear” that they “were hiding something.” Turning to her next target, she asked, “Why didn’t I know about this, City Attorney Galante? You have to treat everybody [on council] equally, as a unit; that’s the law.” She demanded an outside investigation and said that if it did not happen she would reach out to the attorney general’s Office to investigate the city’s administration.

At the conclusion of public comment, Mayor Burke took over with a 10-to-12-minute explanation of why public trust and good governance necessitated, at a minimum, that the city attorney provide the full council with a written summary of any and all allegations made against Mr. Grant, including what those investigations concluded based on the evidence. Burke also addressed arguments about confidentiality, citing nearly a dozen cities by name that had faced similar allegations against their city managers and how each had issued public reports on those investigations with impunity.

Council member Kyle Chang sided with Mayor Burke and spoke about the need for an outside investigation to restore confidence in city administration, but he did so in very brief remarks.

Bonnie Peat stuck to a simple argument. Harkening back to Brooke Nafarette’ss comments, she was harshly critical of the mayor’s approach and said “the proper procedures were followed,” and referring directly to Burke, she added, “David, you were in the room when that protocol was followed."

Finally, there was Councilmember Scott Minikus who had been mayor when the Dancs allegations and settlement agreement had been concluded and who had signed the $183,000 settlement check. His comments were the angriest of the night in both tone and substance. He railed against David Burke, saying that “David only cares about David.” He concluded that Cypress was once a nice, “quiet city until you [Burke] and others got here.”

With two council members opposed and two in favor of the resolution, they deadlocked. After a few minutes of parliamentary maneuvering Mayor Burke received a reluctant answer from City Attorney Galante that he could agendize and bring the question before the council at a later date when all five members are present. So the controversy now depends on Mayor Pro Tem Leo Medrano. Where is Leo on the issue, and where was he tonight when he should have been present to cast the deciding vote? The city, and even the county, wonders. Leo Medrano was at the IHOP in Cerritos for the Hubert Humphrey Democratic Club Meeting.

A Parting Shot About What It Means or Portends

City council members officially hold non-partisan offices. When they run, their party affiliation isn’t listed on the ballot, which is how it should be. We all want good government services at the lowest possible tax rate. In local municipalities, especially in modestly sized cities like Cypress, ideology should not influence decisions like choosing a city manager or fixing potholes. However, in these hyper-polarized times, that often seems naive.

The current crisis over Dancs, Grant, and what was or wasn’t done splits along party lines: Minikus and Peat, both registered Republicans, support a city manager appointed by successive Republican councils. Meanwhile, Burke, Chang, and Medrano are registered Democrats, as is former council member Marquez. Yet, the more significant divide is between an insider group and a newer outsider group. Scott Minikus captured this sentiment when he described Cypress as a "quiet city until you and others got here."

Cypress, like the rest of America, has undergone significant demographic and cultural changes in the last 20 years, a transformation that seems to make older, whiter, and more Republican residents uncomfortable. As Cypress has become more diverse, it has also become bluer, bringing new people to power. Marquez, for example, is a child of Cypress. When she graduated from Cypress High School and went to UCLA and Claremont Graduate University in the 1990s, it was hard to imagine her—the granddaughter of Mexican immigrants and daughter of Mexican-American farmers who were segregated as youth in charge of the city she grew up in. Today, people like Marquez, Dr. Kyle Chang, and Leo Medrano expect and demand more opportunities than their parents had.

Unfortunately, it might be hard for people like Bonnie Peat and Scott Minikus to accept the increased competition from new groups. They may not consciously see this in racial or gender terms, but even if viewed in partisan terms, Democrat and Republican still map onto those demographic fault lines pretty tightly. So, even if you’re a straight, white, Republican/Libertarian/No-Party Preference male with deep OC roots, consider supporting these newer, diverse leaders. They ask questions, challenge the status quo, and bring competitive elections that improve governance.

To illustrate, when Marquez and Burke were elected in 2020, they were the only Democrats on the council and very obviously in the minority. Yet, Marquez found the courage to question the city’s no-bid trash contract and point out that many of her colleagues had accepted large political donations from that same company. This alienated her from an all-white Republican majority and little was done to address these issues, but years later, Cypress elected its first Democratic majority. Now more questions are being asked—and, unfortunately, more resentment is arising from those being questioned. If they get fellow Democrat Leo Medrano on board they’ll get those answers, no matter whose ox is gored in the process.

It’s possible that Peter Grant is a squeaky-clean super manager and that Bonnie Peat, Scott Minikus, and others did nothing wrong in settling with Dancs. However, it doesn’t look or smell good. Instead of being upset at the ‘outsiders’ for asking questions and pressing for higher standards, we should be grateful they are doing their oversight and pressing for transparency.

Orange County has a long history of one-party rule, which, I would argue, is functionally tied to an equally long history of public finance scandals: the savings and loan crisis, Robert Citron and the bankruptcy in the '80s and '90s, Hari Sidhu in Anaheim, Andrew Do at the Board of Supervisors. If we allow elected officials to slide on things that don’t pass the smell test, and if we let young municipal workers learn bad habits, they will take jobs in other cities and in higher office where they will share and spread the bad practices and low standards that ultimately breed corruption and waste, a problem we all pay for in higher taxes and ineffective programs. So here is my pitch: stay tuned for the final outcome of the present Cypress scandal. But no matter your party affiliation or the city you vote in, support leaders from either party who ask tough, smart questions and want to do things the right way, not just the way they’ve always been done. That might rub some people the wrong way, but it’s better for all of us in the long run.

Of course, the new people, the ‘outsiders’ have got to do their part too. Leo Medrano seemed to side with the Republicans in wanting to avoid tonight’s meeting and, where the Republicans showed, Medrano didn’t. Mayor Burke is going to raise his transparency-focused resolution again when he has all five council members. That will be the moment of truth. Will Leo Medrano stand with Burke and Chang or will he slink off to the Republican side for some reason? We’ve seen it before, a disciplined Republican minority running roughshod over a split Democratic majority. Will Medrano be a vote for transparency and change or will he be the next council member Fred Jung (Fullerton) or Supervisor Doug Chaffe (4th District)? Democrats who have derailed Democratic majorities.

Stay tuned.

Stephanie Wade is the chair of the OC Lavender Democrats.