Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Comment Norcal Resist topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents Clash Over NorCal Resist at Davis HRC Meeting; Some Defend Group’s Immigration Work
Summary
Public comment at the Davis Human Relations Commission meeting included sharply divided views on NorCal Resist: some speakers defended the group’s immigrant-rights organizing and mutual-aid work while others warned against perceived political positions; the commission said invited presentations will be limited to the survey’s sanctuary-city focus.
Several public commenters at the Davis Human Relations Commission’s December meeting reacted strongly to a subcommittee report that referenced local organizing groups.
Leanne Herrickstadt, who identified herself as a volunteer with NorCal Resist, said the commission should distinguish political advocacy from hate speech and urged caution in treating advocacy groups as monolithic. "My safety as a Jewish person does not come from punishing political speech," she said, adding that organizations use emotion and money to shape public narratives.
Other residents pushed back. One speaker described NorCal Resist as an important organizer that helped create local mutual-aid networks and said the organization had played a role in earlier campaigns to close an immigration detention center. Scott Stewart, who said he has worked with NorCal Resist since 2017, said the organization was central to building coalitions and that characterizing it as fringe "is completely meant to undermine our community."
At least one public commenter raised alarming and unverified claims about a "refugee farm project" and foreign influence; those assertions were not corroborated in the meeting and were not adopted as commission findings.
Commission response and limits: Commissioners emphasized that the forthcoming forum and invited presentations will be focused on sanctuary-city issues identified in the subcommittee survey — service needs, policy proposals and coordinated responses — not a general endorsement of any organization’s full political agenda. Chair Baker said inviting groups to present should not be seen as endorsing their positions; the forum is intended to gather specific input on how the city can support immigrant communities.
What happens next: The commission voted to invite the survey respondents to a structured session so commissioners and community members can hear directly about recommended actions and implementation details. The commission will set presentation time limits to allow multiple organizations to speak and to enable commissioners to ask clarifying questions.
Context: The public exchange reflected broader tensions on campus and in the community about Palestine/Israel-related organizing and how local bodies should engage with advocacy groups. Commissioners said they will continue to solicit a range of views and to prioritize directly-affected community voices in follow-up work.
