UPDATED 2/16/26 1:34PM: To include Whitfield’s comments Monday in response to Davila. 

⏪⏪⏪⏪ (WMP&I and Google images)

As announced, the Springfield City Council held a special meeting Friday to purge its “tainted” vote to discontinue a stretch of Wallace Street. Essentially a street only on paper, the body had approved the discontinuance on February 2, which would return the land to abutting property owners. One of those owners was JETS Property Development, LLC. City Council President Tracye Whitfield owns part of JETS.

Whitfield did not vote on the item. However, she presided over part of the debate, and she failed to disclose her relationship to JETS and the main advocate for the discontinuance, her son Jelani Brown. That left an ethics quandary for the rest of the Council. On the advice of City Solicitor Stephen Buoniconti, councilors announced a special meeting last week.

Whitfield did not attend for obvious reasons. Council Vice President Jose Delgado presided. Ward 5 City Councilor Lavar Click-Bruce was absent. Councilor Malo Brown, Zaida Govan, Justin Hurst and Kateri Walsh attended virtually.

The meeting took only about 15 minutes. On the substance of rescission itself, there was only one comment or question. At-large Councilor Brian Santaniello queried Buoniconti about the fate of the un-discontinued street. The solicitor indicated that the appropriate departments would review the land’s potential. He said it might be converted to a salable lot. The would-be street, as plotted on city maps, is large enough to build a home on.

The final vote was 11-0 in favor of rescinding the discontinuance.

However, this was not the only news to come out of the meeting. Ward 6 City Councilor Victor Davila called for Whitfield to step down as president.

Point of order? Davila said he would press for Whitfield to step down. (courtesy Davila campaign)

“I fear the council president’s action has broken the trust that the council presidency requires,” he said on the floor Friday.

This did not come out of nowhere.

Friday’s meeting came a day after Buoniconti released a new review letter about JETS and Whitfield’s interactions with the city. The February 12 review came at the request of an unnamed city councilor. Attached was a nine-page memorandum with nearly 100 pages of exhibits. These documents allege that Whitfield engaged other city offices on JETS’s behalf. State ethics laws prohibit this because of the ownership interest she has in JETS. The review also notes she failed to file disclosures about those interests, as required by law.

The Law Department’s February 5 review, conducted at Whitfield’s request, only focused on whether her participation at public meetings had any ethical implications. She took responsibility for most of that letter’s key findings and has said she contacted the state Ethics Commission as well. Whitfield also subtly backed the Council’s decision to reverse the vote.

As for the February 12 report, she told The Republican it was flawed and reiterated her plans to get an attorney.

“I do not agree with the characterization of those concerns and believe the information presented is inaccurate,” she said according to the paper.

Nevertheless, Davila said he had lost faith in Whitfield as president. He called for her resignation and signaled his next move.

“Therefore, I ask that the City Council president steps down from the presidency,” he said. “If the city council president refuses, I do intend to place a vote of no confidence for the next City Council meeting.”

Whitfield has apologized, but has stood her ground pending word from the Ethics Commission. Some councilors seem prepared to wait for the state body, too. (still via YouTube/Focus Springfield)

Whitfield told The Republican she would not resign. During a press conference on Monday, she reiterated that she had no plans to step down as president.

“I respectfully and firmly decline his wanting me to step down,” she told reporters.

It is not clear if some councilors thought Davila was proposing action that day. That would probably not be possible under open meeting law. However, the immediate response was caution both from those who had supported Whitfield’s nomination as president and those who did not.

Ward 1 City Councilor Maria Perez held up the stack of papers in Buoniconti’s report to illustrate the complexity of the matter. The three-term councilor, who had supported Ward 3 City Councilor Melvin Edwards for president last year, called the entire situation “embarrassing.” Still, without directly addressing resignation should be on the table, Perez urged deliberation.

“This is not to be taken lightly, but let’s do it the right way,” she said.

Ward 8 City Councilor Zaida Govan, echoing similar remarks Ward 7 City Councilor Gerry Martin made, suggested that the state Ethics Commission should be given a chance to weigh in first.

“The actions to call for a vote of no confidence for one of our colleagues is premature at this time,” she said. “I believe we should wait for the state ethics commission to make their ruling.”

The form of any such vote is unclear. The Council President’s position exists in the city charter. Neither the charter nor ordinance appear to have a mechanism to vacate the office. Even the Council’s rules, which are subordinate to statute anyway, do not provide for the vacating of the chair either. Robert’s Rules of Order, which supplements the Council’s rules, generally forbids removal of a duly elected chair.

(WMP&I)

Instead, Davila seemed to propose a resolution of some kind. If ruled in order and passed, it would create political—and practical—pressure on Whitfield.

It is not clear when the Ethics Commission could reach any conclusions. Citing state law, the agency said last week it could not confirm or deny an investigation or complaint. It would be no more likely to comment on the details of the February 12 letter. However, the additional information would take more time to review.