The Chula Vista City Council voted 4-1 Tuesday to open a pair of formal inquiries into the costs and funding structure of Mayor John McCann’s 2026 State of the City address, an event that drew scrutiny for its theatrical elements and reliance on corporate sponsorships.
The vote directed the city attorney and city manager to return within 60 days with a full accounting of city-hosted civic events dating back to 2020, including all costs, staff time, vendor payments, sponsorships, behested payments, and mayor and council credit card charges related to those events. McCann cast the dissenting vote.
The event, held at the city-owned Elite Athlete Training Center, featured a choreographed, pre-recorded video, a live skydiving exhibition and other ceremonial elements. McCann’s chief of staff, Amanda Fredeluces, said in a written statement that the roughly $28,000 cost was covered entirely through sponsorships from 10 companies, including Seven Mile Casino, HomeFed Corp., Republic Services and Cox Communications, with no rental fee charged for the venue.
“The 2026 State of the City Address was fully supported through sponsorship funding, consistent with how the event has been produced in prior years,” Fredeluces wrote.
Other sponsors were Baldwin & Sons, Wellhead Electric Co., Wyyerd Fiber, Neighborhood National Bank, Lolita’s Mexican Food, and Community Health Group.
Councilmember Michael Inzunza, who authored the broader of two referrals passed Tuesday, disputed that characterization and raised questions about whether payments from repeat corporate sponsors — several of whom have contributed to McCann’s political efforts over the years and do business with the city — could constitute behested payments that compromise the mayor’s votes on matters directly involving those same companies.
A behested payment is a contribution made at the request or suggestion of an elected official, directed to a third party — in this case an event — rather than to the official personally, and is subject to public disclosure requirements under California law when it exceeds $5,000, according to the Fair Political Practices Commission.
“My goal is to ensure that we are 100% transparent with the public with every nickel that the mayor has asked for from sponsorships, behested payments, and our tax dollars that are being misused to promote himself,” he said.
Wellhead Electric Company has previously done business with the city, having received unanimous council approval for a $75 million, 50-megawatt battery storage project at an existing Wellhead-operated parcel in the city.
Baldwin & Sons has also previously done business with Chula Vista and holds an active development presence in the region — recently the subject of a state attorney general settlement over its Otay Ranch Village 13 project, a large South County development in a fire-prone area that had been stalled in a yearslong legal battle over wildfire risk and environmental concerns.
HomeFed Corporation is among the largest active developers in Chula Vista, with multiple master-planned communities and income properties in the city, including projects at Otay Ranch, Côta Vera and Escaya.
A bank executive from Neighborhood National Bank donated $104 to McCann’s reelection campaign and a director from Wyyerd Fiber donated $250, according to campaign disclosure filings.
Fredeluces said any contributions that met state reporting thresholds were handled in accordance with behested payment disclosure requirements, and that all funds were used solely for expenses related to the State of the City. She added that McCann paid for his personal skydive out of pocket and has no plans to seek reimbursement from the city or any sponsor.
Inzunza also raised concerns about the timing of the event, noting it was held within a month of a June primary election in which McCann faces a reelection challenge.
“It is completely obvious that this was done as a very theatrical, embarrassing political stunt, wasting taxpayers’ money,” Inzunza said.
Fredeluces rejected that framing, saying legal analysis obtained by the mayor’s office prior to the event confirmed it was not a political event under California Supreme Court precedent. She added that standard city costs such as police presence and city clerk documentation were incurred, consistent with all city council meetings.
Councilmember Jose Preciado, who introduced a separate, narrower referral focused on venue selection and overall event costs, said his concern was less about the politics and more about transparency and process.
“I’m just interested in focusing on the message of the state of the city versus all that might be involved in creating a production,” Preciado said in a follow-up interview.
Councilmember Carolina Chavez, who supported both referrals, said the inquiry was consistent with questions the council had already been asking about how city events are funded and organized.
“We owe it to our constituents and to ourselves to have a better understanding of how we procure funding, how we get sponsorships,” Chavez said.
McCann defended the event on the dais, noting that other cities — including San Diego, which holds its State of the City at the Balboa Theater — also use off-site venues. He said the council inquiry amounted to a politically driven review of established civic tradition.
“We had a successful state of the city and I’m very proud of it and we did it in a legal and transparent way,” McCann said.
The city manager and city attorney are expected to present their findings to the full council within 60 days.