Congressional candidate Tom Vo sent Westminster City Council a formal letter on March 19 asking the city to adopt an ordinance banning the Communist Government of Vietnam from renting, buying, or leasing any city-owned property. Six days later, his fellow CA-45 candidate Amy Phan West asked the council to put that item on a future agenda.

Mayor Chi Charlie Nguyen said no.

Phan West's request came during council comments near the close of the March 25 regular meeting, roughly three hours in. Nguyen turned to the city attorney. The answer he got back: the city could get sued. Nguyen said he opposed agendizing the item.

Tom Vo's letter

Vo's March 19 letter, addressed directly to Nguyen and the full council, was not subtle. A Vietnam War veteran and former fighter pilot, Vo wrote that he was responding to the Vietnamese government's effort to build influence in Orange County through the Vietnam-United States Innovation and Investment Forum held at the Anaheim Convention Center that week.

"Westminster sits at the heart of Little Saigon, the largest Vietnamese community outside of Vietnam," Vo wrote. "Our community was built by refugees who fled the communist regime after the fall of Saigon in 1975. Little Saigon stands as a symbol of freedom and resistance to communism. Allowing the very regime that drove our families from our homeland to establish a presence on city property would dishonor that legacy."

He urged the council to place the ordinance on the agenda and move swiftly toward adoption. Vo sent a similar letter to Garden Grove.

The council did not act when the letter arrived. Then Phan West raised it from the dais six days later.

Phan West and VietRISE: she led that fight too

This was not the first time Phan West has pushed Westminster to take a formal stand against communist influence in the community. In September 2025, it was Phan West who moved to agendize a resolution condemning local nonprofit VietRISE after the organization held a seminar featuring quotes from Ho Chi Minh, which she characterized as communist propaganda targeting Vietnamese-American youth.

The council voted 3-2 to schedule the item. Westminster ultimately passed the VietRISE condemnation. Nguyen went along.

That time, opposing communism was cost-free. There was no lawsuit risk, no difficult legal question, no adversary with legal standing to push back. Wednesday night, when the ask required something more than a symbolic vote, Nguyen found the exit.

The legal argument — and why it does not hold up

Nguyen's lawsuit concern deserves more scrutiny than he gave it. His city attorney raised the possibility of legal challenge. That is true of almost any meaningful local ordinance.

Several states have already moved on exactly this issue. Florida's SB 264 restricts property purchases by individuals domiciled in China and entities tied to other foreign adversarial governments. The law was challenged in federal court, and in November 2025, the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals refused to block it, allowing enforcement to continue while litigation proceeds. Courts have shown they are willing to let these laws stand when they are targeted at foreign government actors rather than ethnic groups broadly.

Vo's letter, and Phan West's ask, was not about banning Vietnamese Americans from buying property. It was about banning the Communist Government of Vietnam — a foreign authoritarian regime — from accessing city-owned land. That is a materially different legal question, and it is one other jurisdictions have begun to answer.

Phan West was not asking to pass an ordinance on the spot. She was asking to put the item on a future agenda so the council could have the conversation and get a full legal analysis. Westminster has moved forward on far more legally murky ground. The city pursued a costly lawsuit against two of its own council members over meeting decorum. Refusing to even schedule a discussion about foreign government access to city property is a choice, not a legal necessity.

The lawsuit question cuts both ways

Nguyen expressed concern about lawsuits Wednesday night. That is an interesting position for him to take.

Nguyen voted to authorize the city to sue Councilmembers Phan West and NamQuan Nguyen — his own colleagues — over meeting conduct. That lawsuit has consumed city legal resources and taxpayer money. A default judgment was obtained against NamQuan Nguyen. Phan West's motion to dismiss was denied. The case heads to trial in 2026.

The mayor has shown he has no objection to the city using litigation as a tool when the target is a political opponent. His sudden risk-aversion appeared only when the ask was to stand up to an actual foreign communist government.

The political backdrop

Nguyen, Phan West, and Vo are all running in the June 2026 primary for California's 45th Congressional District. All three have built their campaigns, at least in part, on their opposition to communism and their connection to the Vietnamese-American diaspora that fled it.

Phan West led the VietRISE fight. Vo wrote the letter urging Westminster to draw a line. Wednesday night, the mayor who campaigns as an anti-communist stalwart consulted his attorney and stood down.

The item will not appear on a future agenda unless a council majority votes to add it.

The discussion begins at approximately the 3:09:00 mark of the March 25 Westminster City Council meeting, available at westminsterca.granicus.com.