Hundreds of people and dozens of public commenters urged the Modesto City Council on Oct. 14 to repeal Modesto Municipal Code 4-23.02 subsection 13, an ordinance that penalizes covering one’s face at public assemblies. Commenters and civil-rights groups said the clause is unconstitutional and has been used selectively at recent protests.

Why it matters: Several speakers and organizations including the ACLU, the First Amendment Coalition and the city’s Community Police Review Board — which issued a 7–1 recommendation in favor of repeal on Sept. 17, according to public testimony — have warned the city that the ordinance could not withstand a court challenge. Speakers told the council that defending the ordinance in litigation would cost taxpayers hundreds of thousands of dollars and would worsen relations between residents and police.

Public testimony: Orion Hall, who identified himself as communications director for Cal Pride, said the ordinance "threatens folks who decide to wear a mask at a protest with a misdemeanor," adding that the ordinance relies on California Penal Code 185 but reaches beyond it. Celia Garcia Perez, a Modesto resident, told the council: "Vote to repeal section 4 dash 23 0 2, subsection 13. Do your job and do right by Modesto." Other speakers documented arrests at protests, complaints about detention conditions and patterns of enforcement they described as discriminatory. Efren Diaz, an organizer with CB BIPOC, said the ordinance "has been weaponized by law enforcement to suppress free speech and marginalized voices." (Quotes are verbatim from public comment.)

Council and board history: The Community Police Review Board recommended repeal on Sept. 17, public speakers said, and the ACLU and other groups set an Oct. 23 request date for an update from the council. Multiple speakers criticized staff and council for repeatedly delaying a council vote and said adding the ordinance to a community survey question did not address the constitutional concerns.

Law and enforcement: Several commenters noted Penal Code 185 already prohibits wearing a mask while committing a crime, and said a local ordinance criminalizing masked presence at otherwise lawful assemblies is unnecessary. Speakers also emphasized the risk that selective enforcement would target marginalized groups; several people said those arrested on June 14 were people of color.

City response and status: The council did not vote to repeal the ordinance at the Oct. 14 meeting. During public comment the mayor and council members listened to multiple hours of testimony and acknowledged receipt of legal and advisory materials. The meeting record shows the Community Police Review Board’s recommendation had been forwarded to the city manager; callers urged the council to agendize an immediate repeal rather than wait for further process.

Next steps: Several community groups told the council they were prepared to sue if the city did not act. Commenters said litigation was likely and would cost the city money; several urged the council to "agendize and repeal" the ordinance at the "next available agenda." The ACLU and First Amendment Coalition told the city they had set a deadline in October for a status update, according to speakers.

Ending: The council accepted public testimony and did not take formal action on the ordinance during the Oct. 14 meeting. Speakers and civil-rights groups indicated they would pursue legal remedies if Modesto does not act to repeal subsection 13.