The Real Story Behind the Censure of

Mayoral Candidate Anita Norton

Introduction of False Allegations Against Me

Due to the earlier legal action I filed against the mayor, vice mayor, and other councilmembers, many are asking why I chose to do that, especially when I am also running to be Mayor of El Mirage. I will assure you this has nothing to do with hoping for some big pay-out.

Certain events and actions by those named in the filing are extremely egregious and cannot be overlooked. These kinds of actions that should never occur to any person, any resident, employee, or public official. I have no doubt that many people in my shoes who planned to run for any elected office, let alone for mayor, would be afraid or hesitant to do so out of fear. I do not walk in fear in doing the right thing. I believe wholeheartedly that I must take a stand against their actions which I have no doubt were done solely for political reasons.

This page provides a clear, factual explanation of what occurred before and during the July 1, 2025 Council Meeting, the July 8, 2025 Special Council Meeting, and the October 7, 2025 Council Meeting, where in the end a vote was taken to censure me in an effort to silence my voice. I believe this was also part of a broader effort to ensure I would not be elected mayor.

Because misinformation has circulated online — including AI‑generated summaries, social media posts, and articles that do not accurately reflect the public record — this page presents the documented timeline, the actual procedures used, and the discrepancies between public records and the narratives that have appeared online.

The following is not commentary or opinion. It is a factual account based on meeting videos, public records requests, which include documented emails, and the City Council Code of Conduct.

1. Background: How the Issue Began

On June 20, 2025, a minor concern about my inquiry about mishandled mail that was intended for me was discussed and resolved by a Department Director and the City Manager. The matter was immediately resolved when brought to the City Manager's attention.

However, three days later, on June 23, 2025, Mayor Hermosillo began to escalate the resolved issue into a formal complaint, despite being told by the City Manager that the matter had already been addressed. Through a series of emails that week, the mayor directed staff to “proceed with whatever is necessary” for her to take "formal action" against me for a complaint that had not even been filed.

Her first instruction to city staff was to obtain a “written account” from the employee involved. Within five hours of the mayor’s request, the employee’s supervisor asked the employee to submit one. The employee complied by sending an unsigned, undated letter by email. The employee did not state that her letter was a complaint. In fact, she wrote: “Attached is the letter requested per my incident with Councilwomen [sic] Anita Norton‑McDaniel.” She then began her letter with: “Here are my recollections of my interaction with the Councilwoman.” The employee’s letter did not allege harassment, misconduct, or any violation of policy.

Despite having no evidence of misconduct and no written, signed, and notarized complaint, the mayor initiated a disciplinary process against me on June 23 without following required procedures outlined in the Council Handbook, including:

• scheduling an agenda item on the July 1, 2025 Regular Council meeting to remove me from my role serving on CDAC, the Community Development Advisory Committee, and recommending Jacque Parsons in my place and Ryan Eldridge as the alternate. (The mayor used false pretenses for this action as something that would "create a more cohesive council."

• the failure of having a signed, written, and notarized complaint as required by the Code of Conduct,

• the failure of having a thorough investigation conducted,

• the failure of meeting with the accused (me) before taking any action,

• the failure to provide documentation, including evidence of specific Code of Conduct violations,

• the failure to ensure evidence preservation,

• failure to follow the Code of Conduct requirement that complaints be written, factual, and not verbal accusations,

• failure to have an outside agency conduct an investigation.

The City later acknowledged that key video footage was destroyed or not preserved, despite formal requests by me for the recordings.

Throughout the week of June 23, 2025, the mayor sent numerous emails directing staff to get the employee to sign and notarize her letter. Four days after the mayor initiated her "action" against me, staff had to ask the employee to sign her letter and have it notarized and whether she wanted it to be treated as a complaint, as the employee had not presented it as a complaint, but rather complied with the mayor's request for a "written account."

In addition, on June 30, 2025, the mayor and vice mayor directed the City Clerk to schedule a special meeting for July 8, 2025 for disciplinary action and sanctions against me, before the mayor had even notified me of a complaint.

All of this information was obtained through public records requests, which show the mayor’s and vice mayor's direct involvement in creating a complaint that did not contain allegations of misconduct, but instead reflected a narrative shaped by the mayor that does not align with the facts.

2. The July 1, 2025 Regular Council Meeting (My removal from CDAC)

Retaliatory/disciplinary action under false pretenses.

Agenda Item #1 was consideration and action to remove me from my role on CDAC and appoint Jacque Parsons in my place and Ryan Eldridge as the alternate. During discussion on this agenda item, the mayor initially claimed removing me from my position on CDAC was to create a “more cohesive council,” a justification that did not align with the duties or purpose of CDAC. Later in the meeting, both she and Councilmember Dorcey contradicted their earlier explanations, stating that the removal was actually a “vote of no confidence” and that there were “other reasons” they would discuss later.

After the meeting, Councilmember Winston approached me outside Council Chambers and said: “You’ll never be mayor.”

Since I had not yet publicly stated my intention to run for mayor, but had told a few other people, including Jacque Parsons when she was running as a council candidate, Councilmember Winston's comment made clear the true motive behind my removal from CDAC and the so‑called “disciplinary concerns.”

3. The July 8, 2025 Special Meeting for Disciplinary Action and Sanctions

What the record shows.

The July 8 meeting took place during the Council hiatus even though the city manager, the city attorney and I were not available to attend it. I submitted a formal written request to the mayor to re-schedule the meeting since I already had a pre-planned vacation during the Council hiatus and would not be available to attend either in person or by phone. In that request, I also informed the mayor that I would want the meeting to be held in public,"upon my return." I further stated, "To proceed with a July 8 special meeting—during council hiatus, without adherence to required procedures and in my absence—would be inconsistent with the principles of due process and public accountability." Despite the mayor knowing that both the city manager and I would be out of town on planned vacations and that the city attorney asked if the meeting could also be scheduled to another date as he would also be unable to attend, the mayor insisted that it proceed in our absences during the Council hiatus, although no emergency existed to warrant such a position.

What Happened During the Special Meeting Held in My Absence:

1. Verbal accusations were presented, even though the Code of Conduct prohibits them.

2. A “complaint” was discussed that did not match the employee’s actual written statement but rather based upon the mayor's personal narrative which did not reflect the employee's words.

3. No evidence was provided to support any of the verbal allegations, which again per the Code of Conduct are not allowed to be formally discussed.

4. No evidence was provided to identify how the employee's requested complaint violated the code of conduct.

5. A purported August 2017 "memo" containing numerous slanderous and false allegations against me was read aloud by vice mayor Jacque Parsons that bore no author or addressee and had no valid meta data to show its authenticity. I was not even on the Council at that time.

   • This same memo was read aloud in October and November of 2017 by then Mayor Mook and former city manager Isom who were vehemently opposed to consideration of me for an appointment to the Council to fill a council vacancy. (I had stood against them in 2015 when they were violating the property rights of several residents and with the help of the Attorney General prevailed against them, as they were violating the Constitution, Arizona state law, and the city's zoning ordinance.)

   • No other council members were ever made aware of the so-called memo prior to it being read during the October 3, 2017 Council meeting, nor was there any evidence of any investigation or consideration of it by the Council or any other authority. After then City Manager Isom read the purported memo in the October 3, 2017 meeting during Call to the Public (which was a violation of the Open Meeting Law, as well as very unethical), he was fired two weeks later by the then Council majority. Ultimately, I was appointed to fill the council vacancy by a council majority on November 7, 2017, even after the then mayor read the purported memo about me during that meeting in an effort to disrupt my appointment to the Council.

6. During the July 8, 2025 Special meeting, Mayor Hermosillo opened the meeting with a prepared statement describing a “long‑standing pattern of behavior,” without any proof to substantiate her claims.

7. The council discussed disciplinary action against me in my absence and without due process.

8. Residents who were there to witness it and many who watched the video of the meeting were incensed at the lack of due process and the false allegations that were presented about me without one shred of evidence to support them, as seen by the many comments posted online.

My commitment is to transparency, accuracy, and accountability and service to the residents of El Mirage.

Over several years, many residents have witnessed and raised concerns about wasteful spending, including the $41.5 million in building projects proposed in the 2023 bond election. 81% of voters rejected those projects, yet the mayor and council majority continued to pursue them. I stood with the majority of the voters against the 2023 $41.5 Million bond and have continued to stand. As a result, I have faced repeated retaliation, which escalated after I made the decision to run for mayor.

Residents deserve to know the truth about what has happened — not a version shaped by AI errors, anonymous sources, or politically motivated narratives. And no, I am not a victim. I am a survivor, and I will continue to stand against unethical, unaccountable, and unprofessional behavior by elected and public officials.

I understand that this page may not answer every question. If you have questions about any part of what occurred, the timeline, or the documents referenced, I welcome you to review the materials yourself or reach out for clarification.

Commitment to Truth and Transparency

4. The October 7, 2025 Council Meeting

What actually happened.

Toward the end of the July 8 Special meeting, held in my absence, the mayor and council unanimously agreed there would be a "second meeting to allow (me) the opportunity to respond to the allegations," since I was not present for the Special meeting. It was interesting to hear that councilmember Dorcey told the Council that they could not schedule the second meeting while she was on vacation, but it didn't seem to matter that I was unavailable to attend the July 8 Special meeting due to my vacation.

The second meeting was later scheduled to be on the agenda of the October 7 meeting. When the time came for Agenda Item #3, at approximately 8:00 pm, the mayor said it was my opportunity "to speak and respond to the allegations." However, once I was recognized and given the floor by the mayor, I was interrupted more than 77 times by the mayor, vice mayor, and other councilmembers as I attempted to present documented evidence obtained through public records requests — evidence showing the mayor’s and vice mayor’s involvement in manufacturing the formal complaint.

Shortly after 10:05 pm during the October 7 meeting, the mayor, vice mayor Parsons, councilmembers Monica Dorcey, Donna Winston, and Ryan Eldridge voted to censure me, each reading from pre-prepared written statements.

The live-streamed video recording shows:

• The mayor and other councilmembers repeatedly interrupted me when I had the floor more than 77 times while I was attempting to present evidence. The first interruption began in less than three minutes after I began to speak.

• The mayor's repeated interruptions prevented me from completing sentences or showing the full documentation I had obtained.

• There was a time while I was speaking that Councilmember Monica Dorcey yelled at me several times and made threatening gestures towards me and then followed with a four-letter expletive at me seconds after the mayor called for a 5-minute recess after her outburst. This is all seen in the live-streamed video, including the expletive that was caught on a hot mic while the video was still streaming.

• The fact that the mayor and the Councilmembers who voted to censure me each read pre‑written statements at the time of their vote, indicated the outcome was predetermined before the meeting began.

• Evidence contradicting the allegations was not allowed to be presented.

• The employee’s actual statement did not support the allegations used to justify the censure or "disciplinary" action.

• Members of the public present at the October 7 meeting were threatened to be removed when they did benign things like clap for me.

• It should also be noted that several residents who heard and saw Councilmember Dorcey's f-bomb at me filed written complaints of her behavior. No disciplinary action was taken against her and to this day, she has not apologized. In fact, when asked why she had not apologized to me, she said I "did not deserve an apology."

No Arizona law gives the El Mirage City Council or any other Common Council authority to discipline another elected official. That authority belongs solely to the voters through elections and recall.

False Allegations on TheRealElMiragePolitics Page

Another social media platform, based in El Mirage is TheRealElMiragePolitics page, created in January 2024 by several councilmembers and includes Councilmembers Donna Winston as an Admin — has recently and repeatedly used false allegations to place me in a false light with voters and the public at large. One example is a headline they have posted multiple times:

“Anita Norton‑McDaniel Wants to be Mayor — But First She Wants $1.5 Million from El Mirage.”

That headline is false and misleading. The post includes a link to an article written by someone who showed a clear bias for the mayor, which presents false, defamatory comments from unnamed sources as though they are factual. The article omits key public‑record information and reinforces a narrative that does not align with documented evidence.

Not only does TheRealElMiragePolitics page intentionally post false information about the lawsuit, but putting the link of an AI or a news article that they would know to have false allegations shows their intent to further sow those false allegations against a political opponent and fellow councilmember.

And yes, I am seeking legal action against the mayor, vice mayor, and Councilmembers Dorcey, Winston, and Eldridge for defamation, political retaliation, false light, and First Amendment violations. When public officials choose to use their office to defame or damage another person’s reputation for political purposes or in retaliation, accountability is absolutely necessary. The actions taken against me by them has nothing to do with governance. To dismiss their behavior as "politics as usual" sends a dangerous message to not only them, but to any other elected official who thinks they can use their office to abuse the rights of others or for political gain.

Also, contrary to their comments made, there is no specific dollar figure requested for damages. As is standard in such cases, I have left the determination of damages to a judge and jury, based on the evidence presented, if a court holds them accountable. The lawsuit seeks accountability for documented political retaliation and reputational harm — not a predetermined financial award.

5. End Result of October 7, 2025 Meeting: Censure and Punitive Sanctions

Some might assume a “censure” is only symbolic. In this case, it was not. The mayor and her council majority paired the word “censure” with punitive and unlawful sanctions intended as retaliation and designed to interfere with my ability to fully represent the residents.

One of the most damaging sanctions was to restrict my communication with staff—restricting my communication only to the city manager, city clerk, attorney, and judge. This made employees hesitant to speak with me, partly because the city manager is their direct supervisor and they fear repercussions. As a result, obtaining information or having necessary discussions has been obstructed, and in many instances the only time staff felt free to speak with me was at city events outside City Hall, which are very limited occasions. These sanctions were not only an attempt to silence my voice—they effectively interfered and silenced the voices of the constituents I serve.

They also restricted my travel for training which would be beneficial in my role as an elected official. This was yet another interference with my ability to represent my constituents, limiting my opportunity to gain additional information and skills that could enable me to better serve the community.

Meanwhile, another councilmember who is running for re‑election used the f‑bomb toward me during the October 7 council meeting, never apologized, and faced no consequences, despite multiple written complaints from residents who heard her. In fact, it was that same councilmember who proposed the censure and punitive sanctions against me.

Citizen Portal AI: A Google search of my name shows a platform called Citizen Portal AI which contains lots of inaccuracies and misinformation.

This is a privately owned, out‑of‑state platform called Citizen Portal AI that uses automated AI summaries to generate content about public meetings. It is not a government website, nor is it affiliated with the City of El Mirage. Citizen Portal AI’s content is full of inaccurate and false allegations. It puts out a short summary and then requires the reader to pay $299 per year to read more or comment.

In its story about the July 8 Special Meeting, Citizen Portal AI:

• quotes Mayor Hermosillo in a manner that presents her statements as fact, rather than personal opinion,

• omits that the meeting was intentionally held in my absence,

• omits that the meeting was held without evidence,

• omits that the meeting violated the City’s own procedures,

• omits that the meeting was held without statutory authority,

• omits that the city manager and city attorney were also absent,

• omits the Code of Conduct procedures required for handling complaints,

• omits the objections raised during the meeting by Councilmember Gentry,

• omits that she asked for the video evidence that was withheld,

• omits that she also asked for the evidence and documents that I had requested on July 2 that the City refused to provide me.

There is repeated misinformation with numerous false allegations in the AI‑generated story put out by Citizen Portal AI. This platform has been shared by paid advertising by local candidates and their supporters to discredit me in this mayoral election.

What the Citizen Portal AI misinformation later claimed in regard to the October 7 Meeting

Citizen Portal AI described the October 7, 2025 meeting as a “public hearing and debate”

• It was not a public hearing. This is factually incorrect.

• There was no hearing, no debate, and no opportunity for me to present the evidence I had obtained without repeated interruptions.

• It was part of a regular Council meeting as an agenda item titled “Disciplinary Action and Sanctions against Councilmember Norton-McDaniel" with discussion that began around 8:00 p.m. and lasted more than two hours.

• Again, Citizen Portal AI reported all comments and actions taken by the mayor, vice mayor, and other councilmembers as fact, not opinion, misquoted councilmember Gentry, and failed to mention any of the evidence that I was able to get through in spite of the constant interruptions.

Our community is strongest when we rely on facts, not misinformation.

Contact Anita

Reach out with your questions or support.

Email

Phone

anitanortonformayor2026@gmail.com

623-640-3814

© 2025. All rights reserved.

Facebook Page: Anita Norton For Mayor 2026