Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Mask Ordinance Repeal topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Modesto residents press council to place repeal of mask ordinance on agenda after CPRB recommendation
Summary
Multiple community members and advocacy groups urged Modesto City Council to agendize and repeal Modesto Municipal Code 4-23.02(13) after the Community Police Review Board recommended repeal; no council vote occurred at the Sept. 23 meeting.
At the Sept. 23 Modesto City Council meeting, repeated public comments urged the council and city manager to add consideration of a repeal of Modesto Municipal Code 4-23.02, subsection 13 — the city’s face-covering rule at protests — to an upcoming agenda.
Speakers said the Community Police Review Board (CPRB) recently recommended repeal and asked the council to act promptly. Ryan Hall, communications director for Cal Pride, told the council the CPRB “finally consented to recommend that the city repeal the mask ordinance last week,” and called for the council to agendize the ordinance for repeal rather than allow continued delay. Several other speakers — including attorney Harlan Diven, community organizers from Central Valley BIPOC Coalition, and residents who said they witnessed arrests on June 14 — described the ordinance as vague, overbroad and subject to selective enforcement.
The speakers linked the June 14 arrests to application of the ordinance, saying it had been used against unhoused youth and people of color. Julissa, who identified herself with the Central Valley BIPOC Coalition, asked the council to pair repeal with “some form of reparative action” for those affected. Multiple speakers referenced recommendations from outside organizations including ACLU Northern California and the CPRB and asked the city manager to place the repeal on the Oct. 14 council agenda.
City staff and council did not introduce or vote on a repeal at the Sept. 23 meeting. Several people who spoke said they have attended CPRB and council meetings for months seeking the same outcome. Commenters asked the council to reject further delay and said a community survey request described by Chief Gillespie at the CPRB was unnecessary because public input had already been consistent and ongoing.
The issue remained a public-comment demand rather than an action before the council on Sept. 23; speakers asked the council to respond by formally agendizing the CPRB recommendation and voting to repeal the municipal provision that limits face coverings at protests.
Community members signaled they will continue to attend council meetings until the item is scheduled; at least one speaker named Oct. 14 as the date they wanted the repeal placed on the agenda.
The council did not vote on the matter at the Sept. 23 meeting.
