Culver City reexamines blanket resolution on international conflicts

After an outcry during public comment at Monday night's meeting and beyond, the Culver City City Council chose to further examine a potential blanket resolution establishing the city's general stance on peace and diplomacy during international conflicts.

A detailed direction was issued to city staff outlining the next steps for incorporating the community in formulating this potential resolution. These steps included in the motion that passed Monday night are:

• Send the resolution to the Equity and Human Relations Advisory Committee (EHRAC) and, if possible, the Policy Subcommittee to seek input and direction.
• Direct EHRAC to provide feedback on the resolution, and if passing it would be beneficial to the city
• Conduct community outreach on the resolution and include a virtual option to provide input to EHRAC
• Guide EHRAC to "lift the intention of resolution" and provide actionable next steps or programming, with a note that new programming is not mandatory
• Ensure collaboration between the city's Human Resources Department and EHRAC in the creation of a potential programming piece, which should include education and dialogue to meet community members where they are
• Include background in the text of any potential amended resolution to provide context about the reason for its conception

The conversation around this motion stems from a long-standing topic in the Mike Balkman Council Chambers: the escalation in the Israel-Palestine-centered conflict triggered by an attack by terrorist groups based in Palestine and the violent retaliation from Israel to those attacks.

Councilmember Yasmine-Imani McMorrin felt that the measure's intention was not being articulated or interpreted clearly. McMorrin, who originally presented the idea for the motion on January 27, said her experience as a black woman led her to push for a city that represents all of its voices, no matter how loud they are.

"My intention was not to minimize the grief or the loss of life that is happening," McMorrin said during her comments Monday. "It was to ensure that in our community, we attempt to value the life of all our folks."

Seeing it as a means to implement guidelines for the city's response to these international issues that are "prone to bias" due to their emotional influence, councilmember Bubba Fish originally supported the proposal for a blanket resolution. After seeing the text in the resolution presented Monday night, he had concerns about the message it would send to the community.

"To some, it might feel like an attempt to sidestep the real and specific moral questions that our community has been raising," Fish said. "As written, this risks making folks feel more silenced."

Mayor Dan O'Brien saw the motion as a means to express an overall stance that the council might have, arguing that the council should be focused on locally relevant policy. He acknowledged the passage of previous resolutions in support of Israel and Ukraine during his tenure but said he responded with resolutions because of the "shock of those very instant moments."

"I don't feel capable of rendering [these kinds of] resolutions," O'Brien said. "I am not equipped to nor did I run on dealing with these issues."

However, community members felt the generalization in the motion originally presented on Monday downplayed the concerns specifically related to Israel and Gaza they have been expressing at council meetings since the initial October 7, 2023, attacks and retaliation that set off this escalation of conflict.

"The only thing I could think," Maria Beg said during public comment, "is that this resolution is a direct attempt to silence what we have been asking for for the past several months."

"As a Palestinian-Christian-American who has been living here for the last 25 years, your statement is a slap in my face," commenter Emily D. said. "You are so disconnected from what is happening to your voters."

The other perspective from community members at the meeting mirrored O'Brien's initial viewpoint that a blanket resolution should be implemented to allow the city council to address local issues instead of dedicating time to individual conflicts.

"We are not supposed to use our city council processes to drum up support for controversial foreign policy positions," Culver City Downtown Business Association Executive Director Darrel Menthe said at the meeting. "We shouldn't be engaging in rhetorical battles where the prize would be a statement that would alienate half of the city."

There was consensus amongst members of the council that a clear need existed to continue working on the resolution based on feedback from community members supporting both parties in the conflict.

O'Brien said some people feel unsafe attending and speaking at meetings, potentially skewing the input the city receives. He and McMorrin pushed for an option for community members to provide feedback at EHRAC meetings where this is discussed, which is not currently city policy, according to City Attorney Heather Baker.

Councilmember Albert Vera said that personal conversations with community members have allowed him to better understand the perspective of those who spoke against the motion. He argued a similar point to Fish: the motion sends a message that the city council wants to silence advocates.

"This group has been coming to council for a ceasefire resolution, and a lot thought we were sending them jumping through hoops," Vera said. "It is really about the optics and the timing."

However, he was concerned about the programming piece in the motion, arguing that an additional financial burden on the city should not be an option given the city's structural deficit.

The initial motion proposed by McMorrin gave EHRAC the option to recommend programming as a possible next step. O'Brien ensured it was clear that the motion did not mandate new programs but gave guidelines for any programming that EHRAC would recommend should they deem it appropriate.

Fish also raised another issue: whether or not this type of resolution was necessary or beneficial to the city and its residents. While O'Brien considered it implied, Fish's input led to the direction to include consideration of the resolution itself, along with the already present direction to review the document and provide feedback to make it more acceptable to the community.

"I want their input on it as a whole," Fish said, "not just 'how do we make this good,' but also 'what do you think of the concept?'"

The motion passed 4-1, with councilmember Vera as the dissenting vote.