The letter was remarkable. In an official rebuke of a private citizen, the Riverside City Council accused one of its residents of harassing local employees through phone calls, emails and social media posts.
But even more extraordinary was the fact the letter was addressed to the wife of the city’s chief executive.
“Your pattern of communication has been disruptive at the workplace, caused significant distress to City staff, and serves no legitimate purpose,” read the letter sent to the home of Susan Freeman and her husband, City Manager Mike Futrell.
The Dec. 11 missive is just one of hundreds of emails, texts and letters that have become public recently, shocking residents with accusations of toxic work conditions and “civic indecency” within City Hall. The controversy that has embroiled the prominent Riverside couple has fueled calls for the city manager’s ouster as well as ignited debate over free speech and workplace boundaries.
“It’s a weird story,” said Jason Hunter, a Riverside resident who posted the letter online after obtaining it through a public records request. “It comes down to: Can somebody’s family member be such a distraction that it increases liability for the city and decreases productivity to the point where you have to let a person go?”
Freeman has denied the allegations, describing them as an unconstitutional attempt to silence her criticism of President Trump and to smear her reputation.
“I did not do one of the things accused in that letter and I can prove that,” she said. “But even if I had, it was still my right.”
The furor marks a surprising turn of fortune for a powerful couple who arrived in Riverside roughly three years ago with impressive resumes.
Futrell is a retired U.S. Navy captain who once served as a Republican representative in the Louisiana House. (He’s now an independent.) Freeman, an outspoken Democrat, is a longtime communications specialist who has worked as a consultant on diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts and wrote a self-help book called “Own Your Story.”
She quickly became a high-profile local figure.
At their hillside home in the prestigious Victoria neighborhood, she hosted holiday parties, networking dinners and a women’s wellness retreat. She graduated from a Chamber of Commerce leadership program and spoke at a series of public events.
Some began expressing concern over her activities.
On Sept. 22, 2024, an anonymous email to City Council members took issue with Freeman meeting with municipal staffers. Among them was then-Community and Economic Development director Jennifer Lilley, whom Freeman describes as a friend.
“While personal relationships can intersect with professional matters, such meetings involving a non-staff individual risk blurring critical boundaries and could be perceived as exerting undue influence or favoritism,” the email stated.
Another message from the same email account flagged a Facebook post by Freeman, saying it “may impact the public perception of our city leadership.” The post, dated the morning after the presidential election, featured the image of a swastika, above which Freeman wrote, “a dictator will dismantle Education because it plays a crucial role in shaping citizens’ ability to think critically…”
Councilmember Jim Perry forwarded the complaint to Futrell, writing, “FYI.” Futrell then forwarded the message to his wife without comment. “They are wrong,” she replied. “This is history. This is America. This is my first amendment right.”
Over the next year, Freeman continued to post frequently on Facebook. Then she learned that a city official had given a presentation to council members that depicted her social media activity as problematic, she said.
She responded by emailing the City Council and Mayor Patricia Lock Dawson a five-page PDF defending her online activity.
“Attempts — whether direct or through proxies — to silence me are not only hurtful; they are unconstitutional,” she wrote in the Dec. 4, 2025, email.
The City Council sent its rebuke to Freeman a week later.
In addition to harassing city employees, the letter claimed, Freeman had made comments insinuating she was part of the city’s decision-making team. And while the letter recognized her right to promote her business endeavors, “your relationship with the City Manager creates a feeling of pressure for City staff when you solicit City employees to participate in services they have to pay for or ask City staff for donations,” it stated.
Freeman strongly denied the allegations in an interview with The Times. She conceded that she once emailed city employees to request donations for a tool lending library she was helping to create. But while she suggested that attendees of her women’s wellness retreat pay $40 to compensate a paint and sip instructor, she told city staffers that she’d cover their costs, she said.
She believes some community members became upset with the online content she shares and pressured council members to take action.
“Because I’m the city manager’s wife, these MAGA people thought I should be silent,” she said.
Freeman had filed a public records request with the city of Riverside seeking evidence to back up the council’s allegations, along with records mentioning both her and Lilley. She also requested anonymous or unsigned correspondence received or discussed by city employees.
Although she later withdrew the request, the city produced several tranches of documents, according to its public records portal. Among them was an anonymous letter that accused Freeman of “civic indecency,” complaining that she “manages to insert herself into every city function, non-profit event, educational gathering and other governmental events alongside the city manager.”
The city also released anonymous letters sent to both Futrell and Lock Dawson in 2024 alleging that Lilley had created a toxic workplace atmosphere.
Freeman received an anonymous letter containing similar allegations against Lilley at her home, she said. She wanted to find out who was responsible for the letters directed at both her and Lilley and emailed two of her husband’s subordinates — the human resources director and deputy director of Parks, Recreation and Community Services — asking if they played a role.
She also emailed two council members and asked for help finding out who wrote the “very horrible anonymous letters.”
“After everything Jennifer, Mike and I do for this city this kills,” Freeman wrote.
No one replied to her, she said.
Lilley told The Times the city terminated her contract March 19, but she’s not sure why. A city spokesperson declined to provide additional details. Lilley denied the allegations in the anonymous letters and said she stood by her work.
Soon after Freeman received the letter from the City Council, Futrell was contacted by a recruiter from Pasadena, and Freeman encouraged him to take the call, she said. On April 15, the Pasadena City Council announced it would appoint Futrell city manager.
Things could have ended there, with Futrell quietly moving on and the letter’s existence likely remaining known only to a small group of City Hall insiders.
But then Freeman got into a dispute with Hunter, a onetime city employee-turned-whistleblower who is a frequent commenter at City Council meetings. In March, he sued Riverside over a ballot measure to raise the sales tax, alleging the title and summary were misleading.
A local news outlet, the Raincross Gazette, posted an article about the lawsuit on Facebook. In the comments section, Freeman defended the ballot measure and called Hunter “a serial complainant and litigant in Riverside civic affairs, repeatedly using ethics complaints, appeals, public comment, and lawsuits to fight City officials and public measures.”
“Watch dog or rabid dog; I am not sure,” she wrote.
Hunter was surprised by Freeman’s animus. He tried to report her but she blocked him, he said.
The public dispute caught the attention of others, and someone tipped Hunter off to Freeman’s public records request in which she referenced the City Council letter accusing her of harassment.
Hunter filed his own records request to obtain the letter and then posted it online.
“I thought, ‘well, you wanna play the Facebook game with me and not let me report you?’” he said. “I’ll go to the busiest page in Riverside County and post this letter and see what happens.’”
Later that month, the city of Pasadena announced that Futrell had withdrawn from further discussion of the job. Both Futrell and his wife have suggested that the letter played a role in the reversal.
“I can’t imagine destroying someone’s life, reputation and livelihood over my Trump posts, which you can see are fact-based and historically accurate,” Freeman said.
Futrell recounted the experience last month at a meeting of Hunter’s neighborhood group, Neighbors Better Together.
“I’m chosen for the post,” he said, according to an audio recording Hunter shared. “Somebody emails the mayor of Pasadena the letter. And the rest is history.”
The Riverside council met recently in closed session to review Futrell’s performance. He urged them to reserve judgment until the “full factual record” was available.
“Some of the allegations involve my wife, my family,” he said at the public portion of the meeting. “They deserve the same basic fairness anyone would expect.”
For now, he remains the city manager.
The post How a ‘toxic’ City Hall was unraveled by ‘very horrible’ anonymous letters appeared first on Los Angeles Times.
