DAVIS, Calif. — The council on Tuesday appeared to seek to ease immediate tensions by crafting a unanimous compromise, though the deeper divisions in the community remain unresolved.
In a unanimous series of votes Tuesday night, the Davis City Council adopted three sets of actions responding to recommendations that emerged from the Human Relations Commission’s MAPA process, formally acknowledging discrimination against Muslim, Arab, Palestinian and allied residents, reaffirming protections against antisemitism and all forms of harassment, and approving additional anti-bias education efforts for the broader community.
The council first voted 5-0 to approve recommendations recognizing anti-Muslim, Arab, Palestinian and ally discrimination in Davis, affirming free speech rights including advocacy for justice for Palestine and the Palestinian people, and committing the city to anti-bias training for staff and council.
A second unanimous vote added language acknowledging concerns raised by Jewish residents regarding antisemitism, hostility and community safety while reaffirming that antisemitism and anti-Muslim, anti-Arab and anti-Palestinian harassment are unacceptable in Davis.
A third unanimous vote approved an additional staff recommendation for community-focused training through Hate Free Together.
The votes followed lengthy remarks from each councilmember, many of whom framed the evening as an attempt to respond to pain expressed by multiple communities while clarifying that the council was acting on policy recommendations rather than adjudicating the underlying report itself.
Mayor Donna Neville said she spent weeks meeting with residents from across the community, including Muslim, Palestinian, Arab and Jewish residents, as well as unaffiliated community members and local faith leaders.
“I will say here, I heard you. I can say that safely. I absolutely heard what you had to say and I took what you had to say very much to heart,” Neville said. “So many in our community are in pain. That was abundantly clear, absolutely abundantly clear to me.”
Neville repeatedly stressed that the item before the council was not the report itself but the recommendations flowing from it.
“What we’re not taking up is the MAPA report,” she said. “From a governance perspective, from a legal perspective, from the perspective of what we as a legislative body are able to do, we can take up those recommendations on their own.”
She also said the council could not expect one meeting to resolve broader tensions in the community.
“I don’t have any expectation that everyone’s going to walk out of here feeling great like we have healed things and made everything better,” Neville said. “This is, as some people have noted, it is the beginning of an ongoing conversation.”
Still, Neville argued the city had a responsibility to engage difficult issues rather than avoid them.
“We need to have these really difficult conversations. We cannot avoid them. We have to engage even when it’s really uncomfortable,” she said.
In one of the night’s central themes, Neville rejected the idea that recognizing one community’s experiences necessarily diminishes another’s.
“I firmly believe that it’s possible to acknowledge the experiences of one group and that doing so doesn’t diminish or any way reduce the experiences of another,” she said. “If we have true empathy, it allows us to hold both of those things at once.”
Councilmember Bapu Vaitla made the initial motion to adopt recommendations one, two and four. He said the city had already recognized antisemitism and should likewise acknowledge discrimination experienced by Muslim, Arab and Palestinian residents.
“In the last couple of years, since October 7th, 2023, we’ve repeatedly and rightly so acknowledged the presence of antisemitism in this community,” Vaitla said. “And for me, it’s clear that we should acknowledge that Muslim, Arab, Palestinian populations in this community also face discrimination.”
Vaitla said public testimony and the record before the council made clear that fear and exclusion were real concerns.
“How can we deny that this is a very real thing happening in the Arab Muslim and Palestinian community, that people are scared?” he said. “Hearing what we’ve heard tonight, the MAPA Report simply puts some of those quotes in specific language on paper.”
He also said he supported addressing antisemitism in a separate motion, but wanted the initial vote to remain focused on the recommendations concerning MAPA residents.
“I fully support a separate motion that addresses antisemitism,” Vaitla said. “But I think what we’re discussing here is anti-MAPA discrimination. I’d like to keep the focus there.”
Councilmember Linda Deos later introduced the second motion expanding the council’s response to explicitly include concerns raised by Jewish residents.
Before making that motion, Deos said the record included testimony describing exclusion, intimidation and silencing.
“The record before us reflects testimony from members of the Arab, Muslim, Palestinian, and allied communities who have described exclusion, intimidation, silencing, and a chilling effect around civic participation and public expression,” Deos said. “I heard it tonight.”
She said acknowledging those experiences was not equivalent to taking a position on international events.
“To me, acknowledging these reported experiences is not the same as this council taking a position on an international conflict, nor is it adjudicating every individual allegation,” Deos said. “It is simply taking seriously what residents communicated when they engaged in a city created process.”
Deos also described exclusion as something often felt before it becomes formal policy.
“Exclusion is often experienced through climate and conduct long before it appears in any formal policy,” she said.
Her motion was then adopted unanimously.
Councilmember Gloria Partida said the process had been difficult but rooted in values she had carried throughout her life.
“I have spent most of my life on social justice and trying to lift up those that are often marginalized,” Partida said.
She also reflected on a common frustration in public decision-making.
“People never feel heard unless you do exactly what it is that you’re asking them to do,” Partida said. “It’s very rare that people will say, ‘I understand that you can’t give me everything that I want, but I believe that you heard me.’”
Partida said the testimony that night revealed common experiences of harassment and bias from multiple sides.
“It was really striking to me to hear all of the sharing that came forward,” she said. “What was striking to me was how similar it was, how similar the experiences of being harassed or feeling like there was bias against them from everyone.”
She added that the issue should not be viewed as a contest between communities.
“This is not a zero sum game,” Partida said.
Later, she made the motion adopting the staff recommendation related to Hate Free Together community training, which also passed unanimously.
Councilmember Josh Chapman said the night’s debate reflected a recurring challenge of local leadership confronting pain rooted in events beyond city boundaries but deeply felt by residents.
“It pains me that our community feels this pain,” Chapman said.
He said conversations with residents had changed how he viewed the city’s role.
“It falls in our lap as leaders of this community to be able to embrace folks who are experiencing these, who have these experiences,” Chapman said. “We do have a responsibility to have a place where people feel safe, where they feel heard, and where they know that they’re welcome.”
Chapman also pushed back on arguments dismissing lived experiences because of disputes over methodology.
“Those are people’s experiences, right?” he said. “We don’t sit here and ask them to verify when that happened to them or how that happened to them or provide documentation of what it is.”
He acknowledged that any outcome would leave some residents dissatisfied.
“At the end of the night when this ends, there are going to be people who are upset with us, no matter what,” Chapman said.
In closing, Neville said recommendations three, five and six were not advanced largely because the institutions referenced were already aware of the concerns and could act independently without another formal city request. The council then adjourned after completing all three votes.
Follow the Vanguard on Social Media – X, Instagram and Facebook. Subscribe the Vanguard News letters. To make a tax-deductible donation, please visit davisvanguard.org/donate or give directly through ActBlue. Your support will ensure that the vital work of the Vanguard continues.
Pure insanity. I’m going to have to watch one of these council meetings again pretty soon, to see what type of people are “in pain” as Neville states, and the reason that they expect the city to do something about that.
Sounds like they need a psychiatrist, more than council resolutions or “training” programs.
. . . “approving additional anti-bias education efforts for the broader community.”
Ooh, ooh – can I attend? Also sounds like a much better use of funds than fixing potholes, for example.
“At the end of the night when this ends, there are going to be people who are upset with us, no matter what,” Chapman said.”
Exactly – see “psychiatrist” recommendation above. And that’s not the city’s responsibility to provide.
I’m sure that will help…
It would help, if they actually realized that the problem is with themselves – not the city, not other people, etc. Too bad that no one is willing to tell them that. (Or more accurately, too bad that they would refuse to acknowledge it.)
If any “training” is actually needed in Davis, it would involve not assaulting someone like Beth. (But in a place like Davis, it’s almost implied that she SHOULD be assaulted. That’s the type of “training” that occurs in Davis.)
My guess is that Trump wouldn’t be all that safe in town or on campus, either. At this point, I guess he’d better not leave the ballroom.
It’s really not helpful you to be commenting like this
Your idea of what’s “helpful” is not helpful. You don’t get to be the sole judge of that.
But you are correct in that the people creating problems for themselves and others aren’t going to see the reality. To which I’d say, sit back and enjoy the show. The more they’re accommodated, the bigger and better the show becomes.
There is no division, unless people accept and promote it. Someone’s opinion of a war in other countries is entirely irrelevant to normal people, in regard to interacting with other people in a normal manner.
That’s also true of any political issue (even housing). Of course, blogs bring out the worst in people.
Suit yourself
Please invoke the five comment rule.
You do know how to count, right (despite being connected to DJUSD)?
That’s four – including this one. Three of which were in response to you or David – none of which had any substance regarding the topic at hand.
Apparently, the community needs a psychiatrist AND basic math lessons, as well as lessons regarding how to put forth substantive, on-topic comments.
Hey RO, your comments on these issues are about as welcome as an upper decker at a frat party. DG once said to you, “You don’t have to comment about everything”. Stick to things you have even a single clue about.
Alan, you also don’t get to be a community judge on anything – you speak for no one other than yourself. And you somehow think that David (of all people) is in a position to lecture me, as well?
I’m making my judgement based on what I see regarding articles/comments, in which folks like YOU “pick a side” for no reason other than what ultimately is a form of ego. That’s what group identification is ultimately about.
Pretty sure that those you’re fighting also consider themselves to be “experts” regarding this subject – do you demand that they refrain from commenting as well? Also, which “expert” are we supposed to believe?
You comment on just about every article regarding this subject – much of the time in direct opposition to the other “experts”.
It’s unfortunate that the “experts” on this subject are wasting the city’s time and resources. Seems to me that Josh Chapman (quoted above) has this about right.
My fifth comment – most of which were wasted responding to personal attacks with no substance whatsoever – including yours.
Enjoy your ongoing proxy war. Though I might take you up on your suggestion and just let the folks who need a psychiatrist (more than a city resolution) “duke it out” while I look on with bemusement.
Last night was awesome. The Jewish and Muslim communities of Davis met in the Town Hall and for almost three hours respectfully listened to each other speak. Each person was allowed to speak for two minutes and everyone adhered to the time limit. Getting all these people together within one room and everyone being respectful and listening was an achievement in and of itself.
It has been a long two and a half years. There has been much pain, suffering and strife. Many people people in this town have been touched by that suffering and when the war will end is still anybody’s guess. So getting the people of this community together, with their disparate opinions, each having a voice, and listen to each other, can hopefully be a step forward towards healing.
While many words have been spilled about the MAPA report. In the year since it was introduced another important study was conducted by Leah Hibbel. It showed that people connected to events half way around the world can be traumatized by those events. It is clear many in Davis have been traumatized by this ongoing horrific war. Last night was an opportunity to share that pain and hopefully it was cathartic for some people. But even if it wasn’t it provided a space for a divided community to sit together and share their humanity.
The Mayor did an outstanding job of running the meeting and the staff should also be commended for respectfully setting the tone. All in all, Davis should be proud of being a place where a meeting like the one that took place last night could happen.
❤️
So much for the positive.
I have a concern about one aspect of what was passed. I worry that political opinion will find its way into the training program Hate Free Together is tasked with producing. Time will tell, but as always, the devil will be in the details.
One moment from last night needs to be noticed that if you were watching at home, you would have no idea happened, because it was off camera.
After hours of testimony it was finally time for the council members to speak. Mayor Neville went first as is her privilege. She spoke for a long time and remained respectful throughout as did most of her colleagues.
Next came Council member Vaitla. He began by addressing what he thought the CC should do and that was fine. Then after some time he veered off and started lecturing the community about genocide. About 20 people who had patiently and respectfully sat through over three hours of the meeting all got up together and walked out.
What compelled Vaitla to go there at that moment I have no idea, and I’m sure, he sincerely believes what he was saying. On the other hand I think I have a good understanding of why so many walked out. The Jewish community of Davis doesn’t need to be lectured about genocide. We have plenty of experience with genocide. In fact, and perhaps he did not realize, he was addressing people, some of whose families survived the Shoah (Holocaust).
Vaitla has a knack for pissing people off and lecturing community members from the dais. I don’t know why he somehow consistently screws up. Last night was another example of him sadly and badly misreading the room.
Thank you for helping to prove my point – that it’s not the city’s problem in regard to the psychological baggage that some individuals are carrying around.
Also, at some point, Jewish people (along with black people, American Indians, etc.) are going to have to stop claiming victim status (as far as the “rest of us” are concerned). It’s been more than 80 years since the Holocaust, and no one reading this was even alive at the time. I’d say that there’s another 20 years (at most) that this particular victim status can be “claimed”.
The fact that you and a group were “insulted” by what Bapu said proves the point regarding a claim of perennial, never-ending, self-perceived group victim status.
The rest of the world doesn’t view Jews or Israel as “victims” at this point – other than what happened a couple of years ago at that music festival. To which there was a reaction that some perceive as disproportionate. (I don’t necessarily view the latter that way, though.)
“Also, at some point, Jewish people (along with black people, American Indians, etc.) are going to have to stop claiming victim status”
Interesting that you would lump Jews and blacks together among others because those are the two groups who experience the most acts of racial and religious violence in America according to Department of Justice statistics.
While you may not see such bigotry and therefore don’t think it’s a problem that doesn’t mean its not a real problem.
I’m saying that (at some point), slavery, the Holocaust, and whatever happened to tribes (that they didn’t do to each other, before the Mexican/Spanish government/missions arrived) doesn’t have much relevance.
In other words, no one cares, at some point (e.g., if you’re operating a casino monopoly, being given vast amounts of land that would otherwise be pubic, or claiming that you’re disenfranchised – especially it if no longer applies).
This goes for “women” as a group, as well – OVER-represented at universities.
And in the case of Israel (the “Jews”), they’re probably viewed as “privileged” if anything, at this point. (Not sure if that’s the same excuse that Hitler used, but I wouldn’t be surprised.)
As a side note, try walking around Oakland or Richmond some night, to see if the “local community” there views Jews as anything other than “white”. Or for that matter, views anyone other than black as an automatic victim.
And yes, that fact “belongs to” the black community, at least as much as whatever is attributed to “whites”.
What is the basis for you stating no one cares?
Personal experience/observation? I’ve been around plenty of people (of all races, to be honest) who aren’t going along with what we’re being told. Someone I’m close to (who isn’t “white”) “doesn’t go along” with the program, for that matter. Actually, more than one person who isn’t “white”.
Not to mention the fact that Trump was elected with the increasing support of Latinos in particular, for example.
Progressives, for the most part, are “white”.
How does that translate to no one cares
I’m not too impressed in regard to individuals who are supposedly speaking on behalf of others, for one thing.
Nor am I impressed with anyone who claims they’re speaking on behalf of an entire group (regardless of whether or not they’re a member of the group).
That sounds like a “you” statement
“The fact that you and a group were “insulted” by what Bapu said proves the point regarding a claim of perennial, never-ending, self-perceived group victim status.”
Huh? What are you talking about? The people who walked out, and despite one of your many inaccurate assumptions, I did not walk out, have not committed any acts of genocide. They are upstanding law abiding members of this community who are well aware of what is going on in the world and share a desire for the killing to stop. They do not need to be lectured by Vaitla, or anyone else for that matter, about international law. He was not saying anything they haven’t already heard and they certainly were not obligated to stay while being lectured from the dais.
The people who left had politely followed the rules and respectfully sat there for almost four hours until Vaitla started lecturing them.
You’re continuing to prove/reinforce my point.
Both in regard to Bapu, and yourself.
He’s an activist, as are you (in a different way).
In contrast, his words wouldn’t mean much to me (other than perhaps an acknowledgement of what’s happening “today”).
In any case, all of this is the reason that it’s not something a city council should be involved with. And yet, they repeatedly are.
One might think that they’d be more concerned about the decisions they’re actually in control of, but I guess that’s not how they think. Largely because folks like YOU (and the entire social justice commission – whatever they’re called) seem to think they should weigh in on such things.
You already noted that you’re not “satisfied” (to say the least) with Bapu’s response. In some ways, I actually respect him for not “reading” (as you put it) the “bullies in the room” (as I may, or may not put it).
In any case, he’s driven by his values (and I do sort of respect that, even if he’s wrong – for what that’s worth).
What amazes me is that Vaitla has a way of insulting community members from the Dais. This is not the first time I have watched him act up there in such a way that totally turned people off. While everyone else on the City Council was trying to walk the line of trying to bring the community together Vaitla decided to lecture the community about the meaning of horrific acts committed in warfare that the people he was lecturing have no control over whatsoever.
Its truly bewildering to me why he thinks its appropriate to act the way he does in meetings. I think he misunderstands the job of being on the CC.
I’m not sure how many comments I’ve submitted in response (today), probably nearing five.
Yes, Bapu is an activist.
But I also don’t really think it’s the council’s “job” to bring people together (witness Robb Davis’ intervention regarding whatever the local Iman said, which was both absurd and unnecessary). Maybe it’s the council’s job to tell people to go home, and stop bothering them with nonsense regarding how adults should behave. I might be willing to tell them that (which is probably reason #XX that I’d never be elected to a council).
Or as George Carlin once said – maybe it’s not the politicians who suck. Maybe it’s the public that sucks (from which politicians originate from).
But now that I’m looking at this again, I’m almost certain that I’d tell all of these lunatics to go home and take their personal biases/problems to a mental health expert, instead of a city council.
“He’s an activist,…” Oh I thought he was a city council member.
In Davis, it seems like some can’ t get elected UNLESS they’re an activist. (Especially a social justice activist.)
Robb Davis was also a social justice activist, but also more humble (and cared to some degree about what others think – even if he didn’t understand it).
In contrast, Bapu just says “screw you” (Trump-style, in a way).
But honestly, who cares what Bapu has to say, as well? His power is limited (partly by Measure J, for example).
The council (like the presidency) is a rotating roster of people. And I (personally) haven’t been a fan since the early 2000’s. (At the time, I mistakenly thought that was a “normal” council.)
So the people who left are bullies? They didn’t say anything, they simply left. How does that make them bullies? No the bullying repeatedly is Vaitla who seems to not understand that attacking people from the dais is not a productive strategy.
“In any case, all of this is the reason that it’s not something a city council should be involved with. And yet, they repeatedly are.”
Well we finally agree on a point. The city should focus on potholes instead of international politics. But its not the Jews of this community who produced the MAPA report. Its not the Jews of this community who wanted the CC to take this up. Yet after behaving appropriately, according to the rules, and acting with the appropriate decorum, they got lectured by Vaitla.
What you probably don’t know is that the Mapa report made many recommendations to the CC. Many of these recommendations were outrageous, inflammatory and inaccurate. So much so that the CC wouldn’t even take up the report itself. Of the 11 original recommendations the CC adopted only three.