By Assemblymember Tina McKinnor
One week before Inglewood voters go to the polls, an attorney has announced a government claim against Mayor Butts and the City of Inglewood concerning an alleged incident at Votechella on September 15.
The allegation deserves serious consideration. The student deserves to be heard with dignity and care. And voters deserve a clear distinction between an allegation, a firsthand account, and an established fact.
I attended Votechella that evening. Here is what I observed—and what I cannot tell you.
It was a gathering of a couple hundred people celebrating community and civic participation. After the cheerleaders finished performing, their coach asked the mayor, who was standing nearby with Dr. Morris, to take a photograph.
I turned to greet a constituent. By the time I turned back, the photograph was over and the mayor was walking toward the stage, where we were both scheduled to speak. The interval was less than a minute. People were all around us. I did not see a commotion or anything that signaled a problem.
My back was turned during the photograph itself. I cannot describe the interactions that occurred while I was looking away. The fact that I saw no indication of a problem does not establish what someone else experienced.
That is the extent of my firsthand account.
The press release attributed to an attorney reached me through people I understand to be associated with Glory Gray’s campaign. That circumstance raises questions about how the allegation is being circulated. It does not, by itself, establish whether the allegation is true or false.
The release says a student told school and city officials that she felt uncomfortable, but it does not identify which officials received that information or what action followed. It also calls for a Sheriff’s Department investigation.
Residents deserve answers. Which officials were notified, and how did they respond? What formal complaints or reports have been filed, and with which agencies? What process will establish the facts?
Those questions can be addressed while protecting the student’s privacy. I have not reviewed a written complaint or police report, and I will not pretend to know more than I do.
The timing of a public announcement in the final days of an election warrants scrutiny. But the timing of publicity and the merits of an allegation are separate questions. Neither should be used to prejudge the other.
In a campaign season saturated with political advertising, everyone circulating a serious allegation has a responsibility to distinguish verified information from inference. Voters should know who is speaking, what evidence supports their claims, and who is paying to amplify them.
The student deserves a fair process that respects her privacy and takes her account seriously. The mayor deserves a fair opportunity to respond. Inglewood residents deserve accurate information about both the allegation and the response.
Our election will shape this city’s direction for years to come. Voters should weigh records, results, and substantiated facts. An unresolved allegation should receive careful examination, without being treated as a settled verdict.
I have shared what I saw and acknowledged what I did not see. I ask everyone speaking about this matter to exercise the same care.
Inglewood deserves answers. It also deserves the discipline to seek them without turning uncertainty into a political verdict.