Modesto CPRB ad hoc committee urges repeal of citymask provision; board backs recommendation

The Modesto Community Police Review Board on Sept. 17 recommended the city repeal the mask provision in Modesto Municipal Code 4-23.02, subsection 13, after receiving a report from an ad hoc committee and hearing more than two hours of public comment that described the provision as vague, overbroad and chilling to protected speech.

The ad hoc committee—led in the presentation by Wendy (ad hoc committee member) and listing authors Brad Hahn, Nico Lolo Rio and Latricia Beasley Dayrecommended repeal of the subsection that criminalizes wearing "a mask, scarf, bandana, or any other accessory or item that covers or partially covers the face ... and conceals the wearer's identity," with limited exceptions for religious or medical necessity. The committee also recommended that remaining portions of the ordinance be referred to the city manager and city attorney for further review.

Why it matters: community members, civil liberties groups and two local attorneys told the board that the provision has been used selectively and risks violating the First and Fourteenth Amendments. Several speakers said the ordinance had been enforced against people of color and organizers of a June 14 protest while other groups were left alone, and urged removal before future demonstrations.

Committee findings and public input

Wendy summarized the committeewhich examined the original 2019 ordinance, the 2021 amendments, state law (including California Penal Code section 185), letters the group received from the ACLU, First Amendment Coalition, NAACP and CB BIPOC, and comparisons with other California cities. The committee concluded the subsection is legally risky and not needed for public safety; it proposed several alternatives including encouraging megaphone use by event organizers and community training for safety reporting.

More than 30 people spoke at the public comment period. Ryan Roth Gallo, a local attorney, told the board the code "is overly broad, it's vague and I think it really needs to be repealed." Harlan Diven, also an attorney, urged the board to seek investigations into police tactics used at the June 14 protest. Organizers and participants from Central Valley BIPOC (CB BIPOC) and others described arrests and the use of force they said were linked to enforcement of the mask provision. Several speakers asked the board not to condition community safety tools on coordination with the police, arguing that organizers should not be required to register with or be trained by the department.

Board discussion and actions

Board members debated process options: (a) refer questions to the city's planned civic survey vendor (Probolski) for 2— quick questions; (b) ask the city manager and city attorney for a time-bound legal review of the full ordinance; or (c) adopt a recommendation now and pair that with community outreach later. The board ultimately voted on two actions related to the committeerecommendations:

- Recommending repeal of Modesto Municipal Code 4-23.02, subsection 13 (the mask provision). The board recorded the motion and, by roll call, approved a recommendation to the city manager to repeal subsection 13. The board announced the motion passed with a tally of 7 yes, 1 no and 1 absent.

- Asking the city to include up to three questions prepared by the CPRB in the city's upcoming civic survey (administered by the city's consultant). That motion passed by a unanimous recorded vote of 8yes, 0no.

What the committee did not decide

The committee explicitly noted its presentation was not a legal opinion and recommended the city attorney prepare any formal constitutional analysis. The CPRB also did not adopt the committee's other operational proposals (for example, a formal program to train community volunteers as "eyes and ears"). Several board members and public commenters opposed proposals that would have organizers register with the police, allow officers embedded in crowds in "plainclothes" or otherwise expand police-directed crowd management.

Next steps

The CPRB will forward the recommendation to the city manager for consideration by the city attorney and council. The board also secured agreement with staff to pursue inclusion of CPRB questions in the city's near-term civic survey. The ad hoc committee and several board members signaled they will continue community outreach and may return the matter for further board action once the city manageror city attorney provides analyses or council direction.

Ending

Board Chair Solorio closed discussion after the votes and the meeting moved to other business pieces.