After over two years, my FPPC complaint against Doria Robnson for incorrectly recusing herself from a vote in violation of the law has been resolved. Just yesterday, the FPPC published a proposed
“Stipulation, Decision and Order” agreed to by Doria Robinsion that will be the, “..final disposition of the violations.” Part of the stipulation is,
“It is further stipulated and agreed that Respondent (Robinson) has violated the Political Reform Act.” (FPPC Case No. 2025-00236)

Just to remind anyone who may not know or has forgotten what this is all about, it all goes back to a $35 million Strategic Growth Council grant to the City of Richmond, some $10 million of which
was directed to Urban Tilth, including an Urban Tilth program called “Rich City Rides,” which is essentially Najari Smith, Robinson’s live-in boyfriend and co-owner of their home.

All of this might have simply raised a few eyebrows about internal conflicts of interest at the nonprofit Urban Tilth but otherwise would not have been illegal if Robinson had not run for City Council and been elected.
Being an elected official while the City is doling out $10 million to the nonprofit she heads as well as to her roommate has serious ethical issues whether it is strictly legal or not. In previous opinions, the FPPC had held that Robinson’s conflicts, while
real, could be absolved by a recusal.

But there are strict statutes that define how a recusal must be made, and Robinson did not comply, thus depriving the public about the true nature of her conflict. It wasn’t just about her being the executive director
of Urban Tilth; millions of dollars were also directed to Najari Smith, her romantic partner, and co-owner of her house. She also sought legal cover from the Richmond city attorney, and ultimately the FPPC, but she failed to disclose all the pertinent facts
about her conflict, and so the advice from the FPPC and city attorney was based on incomplete and faulty information.

Unfortunately, City leaders, including the city attorney, circled the wagons and did whatever they could to justify Robinson’s predicament. The solution would have been simple – she could have either left the City
Council or left Urban Tilth, but she didn’t; she wanted it all.

For additional information see:

• FPPC Reopens Doria Robinson Investigation, February 14, 2005
• Doria Robinson Investigation Kicked Back to FPPC, January 25, 2025
• Doria Robinson Complaint, September 11, 2024
• Doria Robinson FPPC Opinion Based on Incomplete Facts, August 13, 2024

Over the last two years , several RPA sycophants, as well as Doria herself, have relished the fact that the FPPC rejected my initial complaint for "lack of evidence," taking it as an exoneration.
The complaint was then refiled with 53 pages of evidence.

For example, Doria gloated on her Facebook page on January 25, 2025 ((3)
City Council Member Doria Robinson – District 3 | Facebook):

Last year former Mayor Tom Butt filed a second complaint against me with the FPPC after they found the first complaint to be unfounded.

Today they find AGAIN that there is no evidence to support his assertion that I have violated the advice received by the FPPC regarding the Transformative Climate Communities TCC grant.(A grant that
I helped to secure BEFORE I became a council person with 8 other non profits and the city of Richmond brought in over $30M of resources to the City of Richmond. )

This is now in light of video Tom provided of council meetings, meeting minutes and voluminous citations he provided.

Clearly, I have continued to follow the direction given to me by FPPC and I am not in violation of the law.

As I’ve always said I will do all I can to follow all legal advice and stay squarely within the boundaries of the law.

And just like my work on the team who successfully negotiated the half billion dollar settlement with Chevron, I will continue to be a champion for Richmond bring in the much needed resources to
improve our city and focus on moving forward long awaited projects like Mira Flores, Nystrom Village and the MLK center that were virtually forgotten for the past 10 years.

Best

CM Robinson

There will be a modest payment penalty, but that was never the point. Robinson has held herself to be above
the law for a long time, and she has been protected by elected and appointed officials at all levels, but now the truth is clear. She broke the law, she agrees she broke the law, and she will be penalized for it.

This incident, however, is just the tip of the iceberg in a sea of grift and fraud involving Najari Smith
and Doria Robinson. There is the settlement of a lawsuit brought against
Najari Smith, Doria Robinson, Charles Patterson, Urban Tilth, Rich City Rides and Rich City.(Urban Tilth (Related
Corruption Continues – Lawsuit by McGee Settled, August 12, 2025).

In August 2024, Roshni Felonte McGee filed a complaint against Najari Smith, Doria Robinson, Charles Patterson, Urban
Tilth, Rich City Rides and Rich City, alleging that the defendants rented McGee and his family an apartment with serious and injurious defects, harassed, intimidated and retaliated against McGee and ultimately and unlawfully terminated his tenancy without
paying the relocation costs required by Richmond’s Rent Control Ordinance. See Wrongful Eviction Suit Against Richmond
Councilwoman Add to Rich City Rides Dispute, Lawsuit: Rich City Rides, Doria Robinson “Coerced” Tenant
to Leave Uninhabitable Building and Litigation Over Rich City Rides Scandal Begins.

The “apartment” was not zoned for residential use and had never been registered with the Richmond Rent Program or the Richmond
Rental Inspection Program. It was the same premise that Najari Smith illegally and deceptively listed as his residence when running for a City Council seat in District 5 in the 2020 election. Despite complaints of voter fraud being made to the FPPC, the Secretary
of State, the Richmond City Attorney and the District Attorney, all of them declined to investigate – possibly because of the political protection that Urban Tilth and Doria Robnson enjoy.

In June of 2025, McGee’s lawsuit was resolved with undisclosed conditions and the parties sworn to silence.

Interestingly, Bennett, Gelini and Gelini, the attorneys representing Smith, Robinson, Urban Tilth and the other defendants,
received a third amendment to their agreement to provide legal services for the City of Richmond not to exceed $669,990, approved by the City Council on December 3, 2024. Despite Bennett, Geline and Gelini being her attorneys, defending her in a lawsuit at
the time, Councilmember Doria Robinson did not recuse herself.

In another incident of fraud,
Najari Smith filed in 2020 to run as a candidate for Richmond City Council in District 5, listing his address as 801 Marina Way South, which is in District 5. However, Najari
Smith did not live in District 5; he lived in District 3. I complained to the FPPC, but they said it was a local matter out of their jurisdiction. I complained to the city attorney, the district attorney and the secretary of state, all of whom ignored me in
a further example of the Teflon blanket that covers Robinson and Smith. (Will Anyone Investigate Election Fraud in Richmond? January 8, 2025)

Want to receive TOM BUTT E-FORUM delivered to your email address?
Click
here to sign-up to receive the E-Forum. Tom Butt is the former mayor of Richmond, CA, having served 27+ years until January of 2023, eight of those as elected mayor. Tom Butt is an architect
and founder of the 50-year old Richmond architecture-engineering firm Interactive Resources.
He serves on the board of two Richmond nonprofits, Rosie the Riveter Trust
and East Brother Light Station, Inc. Visit the
Tom
Butt website
for additional information about Tom Butt’s activities and a digest of past E-FORUMS going back to 2000,
http://www.tombutt.com. Subscription
to this service is at the personal discretion of the recipient and may be terminated by selecting “unsubscribe from this list” at the bottom of this email. This site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized
by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any
such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included
information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml.
If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.