Press Alt + R to read the document text or Alt + P to download or print.
This document contains no pages.
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPolice Advisory & Accountability Committee 2025-03-19 Agenda PacketPOLICE ADVISORY AND ACCOUNTABILITY COMMITTEE
WEDNESDAY MARCH 19, 2025, AT 6:00 PM
In-Person:
San Rafael City Council Chambers
1400 Fifth Ave, San Rafael, California
Virtual:
Watch Online: https://tinyurl.com/PAAC2025
Listen by Phone: (669) 444-9171
Meeting ID: 861 8590 4369
AGENDA
How to participate in the meeting:
• You are welcome to provide comments in person at the meeting. Each speaker
will have 2 minutes to provide public comments.
• Submit your comments by email to PAAC@cityofsanrafael.org by 4:00 p.m. the
day of the meeting.
CALL TO ORDER–6:00PM MINUTES
1. Approve regular meeting minutes from the February 19, 2025, meeting.
OPEN TIME FOR PUBLIC EXPRESSION
The public is welcome to address the Police Advisory and Accountability Committee at
this time on matters not on the agenda that are within its jurisdiction. Comments may
be no longer than 2 minutes and should be respectful to the community.
OTHER AGENDA ITEMS
If necessary to ensure the completion of the following items, the Chairperson may
establish time limits for the presentations by individual speakers.
2. Other Agenda Items:
a. Response to the U.S. Customs & Immigration and the San Rafael Police
Department report and presentation.
Recommendation: Provide recommendations.
b. Public Comment Time Limitations, San Rafael City and SRPD staff
Recommendation: Discuss the public comment period time limit for PAAC
meetings.
c. Racial Identity and Profiling Act (RIPA), David Swing, Retired Police Chief,
California Police Chiefs Association-Past President Representative, Prior RIPA
Advisory Board Member. Kyle Williams, Marin County Sheriff’s Department
and SRPD staff
Recommendation: Receive the informational report.
STAFF LIAISON REPORT
3. Other brief program updates or reports on any meetings, conferences,
and/or seminars attended by staff.
COMMITTEE REPORTS
4. Other brief reports on any meetings, conferences, and/or seminars attended by the
Committee members.
ADJOURNMENT
Any records relating to an agenda item, received by a majority or more of the Board less than 72 hours before the meeting, shall be
available for inspection online and in the city hall large conference room, third floor, 1400 5th Avenue, San Rafael, Califor nia placed
with other agenda-related materials on the table in front of the location pri or to the meeting. Sign Language interpreters may be
requested by calling (415) 485-3066 (voice), emailing city.clerk@cityofsanrafael.org or using the California Telecommunications Relay
Service by dialing “711”, at least 72 hours in advance of the meeting. Copies of documents are available in accessible formats upon
request
POLICE ADVISORY AND ACCOUNTABILITY COMMITTEE (PAAC)
WEDNESDAY FEBRUARY 19, 2025, AT 6:00 PM
In-Person:
San Rafael City Council Chambers
1400 Fifth Ave, San Rafael, California
Virtual:
Watch Online:
https://tinyurl.com/PAAC2025
Listen by Phone: (669) 444-9171
Meeting ID: 898-5264-7245#
MINUTES
CALL TO ORDER
Chair Tokolahi called the meeting to order at 6:00 PM and requested a roll call. Alternate
Member Locks voted in the absence of Vice Chair Davidi who arrived at 6:28 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Present: Member Daniel Alm
Member Marilyn Alvarez
Member Paula Kamena
Member Mydung Nguyen
Member Darlin Ruiz
Vice Chair Davidi (arrived at 6:28 p.m.)
Chair Fatai Tokolahi
Alternate Member Salamah Locks
Alternate Member Karla Valdez
Absent: NONE
Staff Present: Angela Robinson Piñon, Assistant City Manager
David Spiller, Police Chief
Scott Eberle, Lieutenant, San Rafael Police Department
Teresa Olson, Sr. Mgmt. Analyst, San Rafael Police Department
Roy Leon, Captain, San Rafael Police Department
Lieutenant Scott Eberle informed the community that the in-person meeting
would also be recorded and streamed live to YouTube and through Zoom.
He noted the two-minute timer for public comment and closed captioning
on Zoom.
1. MINUTES
Chair Tokolahi invited public comment, however, there was none.
Member Kamena made a motion to approve January 11, 2025, and January 15,
2025, minutes, Member Alm seconded the motion.
AYES: MEMBERS: Alm, Alvarez, Locks, Kamena, Nguyen, Ruiz,
Tokolahi
NOES: MEMBERS: None
ABSENT: MEMBERS: None
ABSTAIN: MEMBERS: None
The motion carried 7-0-0–0.
Alternate Member Locks voted in the absence of Vice Chair Davidi who arrived at
6:28 p.m.
OPEN TIME FOR PUBLIC EXPRESSION
Heidi commented on the PAAC Annual Report.
Jason spoke on the topic of homelessness.
2. OTHER AGENDA ITEMS
a. U.S. Customs & Immigration and the San Rafael Police Department
Captain Roy Leon presented the item.
The Committee asked questions.
Chair Tokolahi opened the item for public comment.
Speakers: Jason, Juliana, Tara, Shinji Sakai-Egi, Xania, Heidi
The Committee provided comments.
STAFF LIAISON REPORT
Lieutenant Eberle reminded the Committee that the Racial Profiling and Identity Act
(RIPA) will be presented at the March meeting, and the Military Equipment (AB481) report
will be presented at the April meeting.
COMMITTEE REPORTS
• Member Alm attended a West End Traffic Safety meeting with members of Public
Works staff, he also met Chief Spiller for coffee.
• Member Davidi expressed appreciation for public meeting participation both online
and in person.
• Member Locks expressed interest in adding the topic of the public comment time
limit to a future agenda.
• Member Kamena thanked staff and the public for participating in the Annual Report
presentation to the City Council and thanked Teresa Olson for her work and
support of the PAAC. She also shared she attended the 1st Baptist Church Black
History Month celebration , mentioned a new county ordinance for gate safety for
homeowners, and shared a story of reconnecting with a sexual assault victim after
30 years who thanked her for treating her with kindness.
• Member Tokolahi mentioned he is on the Seeds of Hope planning committee and
the next event is in May at the B Street Community Center. He also shared home
visits he has with formerly unhoused people and his work in assisting with financial
education and job placement.
• Member Valdez attended an event at the San Rafael church discussing
immigration rights. She also attended a meeting for the Canal Alliance on 1/29 via
Zoom on the same topic and they have additional informational sessions upcoming
on February 26 and March 26th. They are advertising the dates on their Facebook
page.
ADJOURNMENT
Chair Tokolahi adjourned the meeting at 7:44 PM
___________________________
Teresa Olson, Staff
Liaison
APPROVED THIS _____DAY OF_______, 2025
Page 1 of 1
POLICE ADVISORY AND
ACCOUNTABILITY COMMITTEE
AGENDA REPORT
March 19, 2025,
Item 2a
TITLE: RESPONSE TO U.S. CUSTOMS & IMMIGRATION AND THE SAN RAFAEL
POLICE DEPARTMENT
RECOMMENDATION: Provide feedback.
BACKGROUND:
At the February 19, 2025, meeting of the Police Advisory and Accountability Committee
(“Committee”), the Committee heard a presentation from SRPD Captain Roy Leon. The
presentation is provided as Attachment 1 and the staff report as Attachment 2.
DISCUSSION:
Please note that staff provided much of the background and context related to SRPD Policy 413
and U.S. Customs & Immigration during the February 19, 2025, meeting. The recommendation is
for the Committee to provide feedback during the March 19, 2025, PAAC meeting to staff about
the content covered in the presentation . Staff can also respond to any questions about the
February 19, 2025, Committee meeting.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no fiscal impact associated with this report.
Submitted by:
Teresa Olson
Teresa Olson
Senior Management Analyst II
ATTACHMENTS:
1. February 19, 2025, Presentation
2. February 19, 2025, Staff Report
SB54/
Immigration
Policy
Captain Roy Leon
SENATE BILL 54
▪Senate Bill 54, also known as the California Values Act,
was signed in 2017 and went into effect on January 1st,
2018. The primary purpose of Senate Bill 54 is to limit the
involvement of local and state law enforcement
agencies, in federal immigration enforcement, aiming to
protect immigrant communities.
SENATE BILL 54
▪Key aspects of Senate Bill 54 include:
▪Restricting cooperation with federal immigration
authorities. The bill prevents local law enforcement
agencies from using their resources to assist federal
immigration enforcement, such as U.S. Immigration and
Customs Enforcement (ICE), unless it is related to specific
criminal cases or public safety concerns.
SENATE BILL 54
▪Local law enforcement is restricted from transferring
individuals to ICE custody for deportation purposes.
▪The law allows certain exceptions, such as when
individuals have been convicted of certain serious
felonies, or if they are being sought for a criminal
investigation related to a violent crime.
▪i.e.-Rape, Child Abuse, Kidnapping, Homicide
SENATE BILL 54
▪The law is intended to build trust between immigrant
communities and local law enforcement by ensuring
that people are not afraid to report crimes or cooperate
with the police, due to fear of deportation.
SRPD POLICY 413
Immigration Violations
▪The purpose of SRPD Policy 413 is to provide guidelines to members of the San Rafael Police Department relating to immigration and interacting with federal immigration officials.
▪It is the policy of the San Rafael Police Department that all members make personal and professional commitments to equal enforcement of the law and equal service to the public. Confidence in this commitment will increase the effectiveness of this department in protecting and serving the entire community and recognizing the dignity of all persons, regardless of their national origin or immigration status.
SRPD POLICY 413
Immigration Violations
▪To encourage crime reporting and cooperation in the
investigation of criminal activity, all individuals,
regardless of their immigration status, must feel secure
that contacting or being addressed by members of law
enforcement will not automatically lead to immigration
inquiry and/or deportation. While it may be necessary to
determine the identity of a victim or witness, members
shall treat all individuals equally and not in any way that
would violate the United States or California
constitutions.
SRPD POLICY 413
Immigration Violations
▪An officer shall not investigate, interrogate, detain, or
arrest persons for immigration enforcement purposes,
including a civil violation of federal immigration laws or a
related civil warrant (Government Code §7284.6).
▪An officer shall not use immigration authorities as
interpreters for law enforcement matters relating to
individuals in agency or department custody
(Government Code §7284.6).
SRPD POLICY 413
Immigration Violations
▪The Department shall not collect any information about
an individual's immigration status. No officer shall provide
personal information about an individual to any
immigration authority, including, but not limited to, the
individual's name, physical description, home address,
work address, and telephone number unless that
information is available to the public (Government Code
§7284.6(a)(1)(D); Civil Code §1798.3).
SRPD POLICY 413
Immigration Violations
▪Requests by federal immigration officials for assistance
from this department should be directed to the
Operations Lieutenant through the on-duty supervisor.
The Operations Lieutenant is responsible for determining
whether the requested assistance would be permitted
under the California Values Act (Government Code §
7284.2 et seq.).
▪Full details of the San Rafael Police Department
immigration policy can be found on our website at
srpd.org
CONTACT
CAPTAIN ROY LEON
485@srpd.org
415-485-3392
Page 1 of 3
POLICE ADVISORY AND
ACCOUNTABILITY COMMITTEE
AGENDA REPORT
February 19, 2025
Item 2a
TITLE: INFORMATION ON U.S. IMMIGRATION & CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT (ICE)
AND THE SAN RAFAEL POLICE DEPARTMENT (SRPD)
RECOMMENDATION:
Receive the report.
BACKGROUND:
The San Rafael Police Department (SRPD or Department) is committed to ensuring the safety
and security of all individuals within our community, regardless of their immigration status. In
accordance with the California Values Act (SB 54) and SRPD Policy 413, our Department does
not engage in federal immigration enforcement. SB54 was enacted to limit the involvement of
local and state law enforcement agencies in immigration matters, thereby reinforcing community
trust, safeguarding public safety, and ensuring the ef fective functioning of law enforcement
agencies.
SRPD Policy 413 aligns with this state mandate by stipulating that personnel shall not utilize
Department resources for immigration enforcement. This policy is reflective of our broader
commitment to prioritizing community safety, including responding to service calls, investigating
criminal activities, and working collaboratively with residents to f oster a safer environment for all
in San Rafael.
SRPD recognizes that maintaining positive and cooperative relationships with our diverse
community, particularly with immigrant populations, is critical to the success of our policing efforts.
SRPD places a high value on building and sustaining trust through transparency, pro active
engagement, and accessibility. It is our firm belief that every member of the community,
regardless of immigration status, should feel confident in reaching out to law enforcement for
assistance without fear of immigration -related consequences.
Through these efforts, SRPD continues to prioritize the safety, well -being, and trust of all
residents, reinforcing our commitment to providing professional, responsive, and inclusive law
enforcement services to the entire San Rafael community.
DISCUSSION:
SRPD complies with SB 54 and SRPD Policy 413 by ensuring that our resources are not used for
immigration enforcement. As a matter of policy and practice, the SRPD does not engage in
immigration enforcement activities, including collaborating with federal immigration officials on
investigations, interrogations, detentions, or arrests related to immigration status, unless r equired
to do so by any future federal legal mandates. San Rafael remains committed to being a
welcoming and inclusive city. The following guidelines are in place to reinforce our commitment:
• Non-Involvement in Immigration Enforcement – Officers do not stop, question, arrest, or
detain individuals solely based on suspected immigration status.
• Data Protection – SRPD does not share personal information with federal immigration
Page 2 of 3
authorities unless required by state or federal law.
• Detainer Requests – The Department does not honor immigration detainer requests
without a judicial warrant or a qualifying criminal offense as outlined in SB 54.
• Community Reassurance – Officers are trained to communicate SRPD’s position on
immigration enforcement, ensuring that community members feel safe engaging with law
enforcement.
• Commitment to a Safe and Inclusive Community
SRPD requires all officers to uphold a professional commitment to enforcing the law consistently
and without bias. This commitment is essential in fostering public trust and improving the
Department’s effectiveness in serving and protecting the entire community while ensuring the
dignity and rights of all individuals are respected, regardless of national origin or immigration
status.
A fundamental responsibility of the SRPD is to build trust and establish meaningful connections
with all members of our community. Beyond ensuring policy compliance, we are dedicated to
strengthening our relationship with the immigrant community. We recogn ize that community
safety is a shared responsibility, and it is vital that individuals feel safe and supported when
reporting crimes, seeking assistance, or participating in civic life —without fear or hesitation. Our
goal is to create an environment where every resident feels valued, respected, and confident in
turning to law enforcement for help, knowing that their safety and well -being are our highest
priorities.
To that end, we actively engage with residents through outreach efforts, educational programs,
and cultural events that strengthen relationships between law enforcement and San Rafael’s
diverse communities.
COMMUNITY OUTREACH:
SRPD considers community engagement a core component of building trust, particularly with
immigrant communities. We are committed to establishing strong relationships through targeted
outreach efforts. Recent initiatives have included:
1. Holding Community Meetings in Spanish: To ensure accessibility, SRPD
organizes safety forums conducted entirely in Spanish. These sessions cover
topics such as crime prevention, domestic violence resources, and how to report
incidents without fear of immigration consequences.
2. Participation in Cultural and Religious Events: SRPD actively participates
in community events such as Día de los Muertos, local church gatherings, and
other cultural celebrations to demonstrate our commitment to inclusivity and to
interact with residents in a non -enforcement capacity.
3. Spanish-Speaking Community Academy: SRPD offers a Spanish-Speaking
Community Academy, providing residents with an in -depth look at police
operations, crime prevention, and community safety topics in their preferred
language. This program strengthens relationships, enhances transparency, and
empowers residents to engage with law enforcement confidently .
4. Youth Engagement & Cadet Program: We work closely with local schools to
recruit students for our Cadet and Explorer programs, ensuring that young people
from diverse backgrounds, including Hispanic /Latino students, have positive early
interactions with law enforcement. We actively recruit people from our local
Page 3 of 3
community to fill all positions within the police department.
5. Collaboration with Community Organizations: SRPD partners with
advocacy groups, non-profits, and legal aid organizations to provide resources,
education, and reassurance to immigrant families. These partnerships help bridge
gaps in understanding and ensure that residents know their rights and protections
under California law.
These outreach efforts reinforce SRPD’s commitment to ensuring that all residents, regardless of
immigration status, feel safe, valued, and supported in our community. SRPD remains steadfast
in our commitment to serving and supporting the entire San Rafael community. This includes
every individual, regardless of their nationality or immigration status. The Department’s mission
is rooted in ensuring public safety and delivering equitable service to everyone . We provide
protection and assistance to everyone w e serve.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None
Submitted by:
Roy Leon
Police Captain
Attachments:
1. SRPD Policy 413
2. California Values Act (SB 54)
3. SB54 Presentation
Page 1 of 1
POLICE ADVISORY AND
ACCOUNTABILITY COMMITTEE
AGENDA REPORT
March 19, 2025
Item 2b
TITLE: PUBLIC COMMENT DURATION
RECOMMENDATION: Discuss the item and make a recommendation
BACKGROUND:
At the February 19, 2025, meeting of the Police Advisory and Accountability Committee
("Committee"), Alternate Member Locks requested that the time limit for public comment at
Committee meetings be included on the agenda for discussion. Staff are now presenting this item
to the Committee for further consideration.
DISCUSSION:
In 2023, the City Council adopted Resolution 15196, which formalized the Boards, Commissions
& Committees Rules & Procedures (Attachment 1) to be applied consistently across the entire
Boards, Commissions & Committees (BCC) Program. This resolution sets a standardized
framework for the operation of these bodies, ensuring clarity and consistency in their practices.
Currently, the City oversees 16 distinct boards, commissions, and committees, each serving a
unique function within the community. Thirteen boards, commissions, and committees allocate 2
minutes for public comment during meetings. However, three bodies extend the time for public
comment to 3 minutes: the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee, the Park & Recreation
Committee, and the Public Art Review Board. The staff liaisons to the BCCs intend to standardize
the public comment time to 2 minutes for the remaining boards, commissions, and committees in
the coming months.
Staff recommends that public comment remain at 2 minutes to be consistent with the City Council
meeting and all BCCs and to limit confusion for the community as they maneuver through public
meetings in San Rafael.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no fiscal impact associated with this report.
Submitted by:
Teresa Olson
Teresa Olson
Senior Management Analyst II
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Boards, Commissions & Committees Rules & Procedures
Boards, Commissions and Committees
Rules and Procedures
Adopted on March 20, 2023
by Resolution No. 15196
Page 2 of 18
City of San Rafael, Boards, Commissions and Committees
Rules and Procedures
Table of Contents
Chapter 1. Purpose and Overview ................................................................................ 3
Chapter 2. Duties .......................................................................................................... 4
Chapter 3. Rules of Decorum ....................................................................................... 9
Chapter 4. Meetings.................................................................................................... 10
Chapter 5. Communication ......................................................................................... 13
Chapter 6. Selection Process ..................................................................................... 14
Chapter 7. Attachments .............................................................................................. 15
Page 3 of 18
Chapter 1. Purpose and Overview
The City of San Rafael has a long and proud tradition of open government, and civil and
intelligent public discourse. These Boards, Commissions and Committees Rules and
Procedures (“Rules”) are assembled for the purpose of providing protocols and procedures
for the conduct of governmental business by San Rafael’s various boards, commissions
and committees (“BCC’s”), including conduct of meetings, preparation of agenda items,
scheduling of meetings, public participation, and appointment to and removal from boards,
commissions, and committees. These rules are intended to enhance public participation
and debate so that the best possible decisions are made for San Rafael. These rules apply
to all public bodies of the City of San Rafael with the exception of the City Council.
Appointed board, commission, and committee members and Staff Liaisons are expected
to understand and comply with these Rules.
For purposes of this document, all City boards, commissions and committees other than
the City Council are referred to as “BCC’s” and all their respective members are referred
to as “Commissioners”.
These rules have been formally adopted by resolution of the City Council (Resolution No.
15196) and are subject to review. If during the course of their official duties Commissioners
encounter an item that affects the business of the BCC and that item is not covered in this
document, the BCC shall not take action and the Staff Liaison shall consult the City
Attorney.
Page 4 of 18
Chapter 2. Duties and Responsibilities of Commissioners
1. Duties of the Chair
A. All City BCC’s elect a presiding officer, known as the Chair, for a one-year
period; appointment procedures are set forth in greater detail below. BCC’s
may have the Staff Liaison serve as the Chair. However, where the Staff
Liaison serves as the Chair they shall neither vote nor deliberate on BCC
matters. The Staff Liaison shall serve in a purely advisory role, unless
otherwise specified in the bylaws.
B. The Duties of the Chair shall include the following:
i. Ensure that consideration of items on the agenda move along without
delay.
ii. Ensure that community input is received, if any.
iii. Ensure that decorum is maintained at the meeting.
iv. In presiding over agendized matters where the public has provided
testimony and/or raised questions:
a. Direct questions or comments requiring a response to staff for a
response.
b. If necessary, help keep Commissioners’ questions relevant to the
matter being considered by the BCC.
c. If necessary, consider calling for a brief recess, or adjournment,
if orderly conduct of the meeting is being disrupted.
d. Announce the decision of the BCC on all subjects.
v. To ensure that each member of the BCC is provided an opportunity to
completely express their views on items of business, recognize each
Commissioner and give them the opportunity to provide feedback.
2. Duties of Vice Chair
In the absence of the Chair, a Vice-Chair shall possess all powers of the Chair and
be subject to all prescribed duties for that position during the Chair’s absence.
3. Duties of Commissioners
Page 5 of 18
A. Attend and arrive on time for all BCC meetings.
Attendance at any regularly scheduled meeting is a necessary part of being an
effective Commissioner. If a Commissioner is unable to attend a regularly
scheduled meeting, the Commissioner shall notify the Staff Liaison in advance
of a regularly scheduled meeting to have an excused absence.
B. Review all meeting materials in preparation for BCC meetings.
4. Duties of Alternates
A. Attend and arrive on time for all BCC meetings.
Attendance at any regularly scheduled meeting is a necessary part of being an
effective Alternate Commissioner. If a Commissioner is unable to attend a
regularly scheduled meeting, the Commissioner shall notify the Staff Liaison in
advance and the Alternate Member shall be notified of their attendance as a
full voting member, and be recognized as such during the roll call.
B. Review all meeting materials in preparation for BCC meetings.
C. Vote in the absence of a full voting member.
D. If more than one Alternate member exists, there shall be a pre-determined first
and second Alternate, and they shall alternate between first and second
Alternate member annually. First Alternates shall vote in the absence of one
voting member, and Second Alternates shall vote in the absence of a second
voting member.
E. If no full voting member is absent, the Alternate Member shall still attend
meetings, deliberate, and ask questions of staff, but shall not vote.
5. Duties of Staff Liaison
A. The City Manager or their designee shall designate a Staff Liaison to each
BCC. The Staff Liaison has the following responsibilities:
i. Prepare meeting agendas and staff reports (verbal or written as needed).
ii. Notify the City Clerk of consecutive unexcused absences, issues with
attendance, resignations, and Commissioner’s change of contact
information.
iii. Ensure that sufficient research and analysis has been performed by City
staff to allow an informed discussion by the BCC on matters before them.
Page 6 of 18
iv. Help facilitate and advise the Chair on meeting management.
v. Ensure that all City departments with subject matter expertise have an
opportunity for input before bringing an item forward for BCC consideration.
vi. Ensure that meeting materials, including a sufficient number of agendas,
and at least one binder of all related staff reports being presented (if any)
at that meeting, are available in physical print format for the public to
examine at the meeting.
vii. Ensure all agendas include the following notice for accessibility services:
Any records relating to an agenda item, received by a majority or more
of the Council less than 72 hours before the meeting, shall be available
for inspection online and in the [location where meeting is held] placed
with other agenda-related materials on the table in front of the meeting
location prior to the meeting. Sign language interpreters may be
requested by calling (415) 485-3066 (voice), emailing
city.clerk@cityofsanrafael.org or using the California
Telecommunications Relay Service by dialing “711”, at least 72 hours
in advance of the meeting. Copies of documents are available in
accessible formats upon request. To request Spanish language
interpretation, please submit an online form at
https://www.cityofsanrafael.org/request-for-interpretation/.
viii. Produce action minutes for each meeting.
ix. Ensure all meeting materials and any other documents submitted to the
BCC at the meeting are retained and stored as material in connection with
that meeting, according to the City’s retention policies.
x. Coordinate with the City Council Liaison once per year to either attend a
BCC meeting or meet with the Chair.
xi. Include the City Council Liaison in the email to Commissioners with the
agenda packet materials.
B. The Staff Liaison, along with the City Clerk, is responsible for ensuring that
appointed Commissioners are oriented about policies and procedures as they
relate to the BCC.
6. Duties of City Council Liaison
A. On an annual basis, the City Council designates liaison positions to the BCCs.
The role of the liaison is to generally stay abreast of the activities of the BCC
which may include attending one or more meetings per year, checking in with
Page 7 of 18
the Chair of the BCC on a quarterly basis, reporting out on significant activities
during City Council meetings as needed, assisting in culling down applications
into an interview list when there is a vacancy, and providing a “mentor” role for
the needs of the BCCs which could relate to answering procedural questions,
facilitating training, or other assistance. Additionally, the Mayor may act in the
acting role of the Council Liaison for each BCC in their absence.
7. Appointment of Chair and Vice-Chair
A. The Chair and Vice-Chair shall be appointed by a majority vote of the BCC
membership at the last meeting of each calendar year, to serve for a one-year
term. The Chair and Vice-Chair shall rotate among the Commissioners based
on tenure, as defined by total years of service. The City Council believes that
experience as a Commissioner will assist those who are selected to serve as
Chair or Vice-Chair, and that it is in everyone’s best interest that candidates
have experience in cycles of governing to acclimate themselves to the jobs,
tasks, and roles of the BCC. In the event the years of service are identical,
tenure will be determined in alphabetical order by last name. It is the general
rule that a Commissioner shall not serve as Chair more than once in the
number of years there are members. However, in the event that:
1. a position is vacated;
2. a Commissioner is not interested in serving as an officer; or
3. there is limited tenure among the other Commissioners, then a
Commissioner may be appointed as an officer more than once in the
number of years there are members.
B. The Vice-Chair shall serve as Chair in the following year and shall be appointed
as such at the last meeting of each calendar year.
C. The Chair and Vice-Chair may not succeed themselves in the same position.
However, in the event the current Chair or Vice-Chair has served less than one
year, the BCC may choose to re-elect them for an additional term.
D. The Vice-Chair shall succeed the Chair if the Chair vacates the office and shall
serve the unexpired term of the Chair. The BCC shall elect a new Vice-Chair
to serve the unexpired term of that office. Selection shall be based on seniority.
E. In the absence of the Chair and Vice-Chair at any meeting of the BCC, the
member of the BCC with the longest tenure, as defined by total years of
service, shall preside over the meeting. In the event the years of service are
identical, seniority will be determined by alphabetical order.
F. This section shall not apply to BCCs where the Staff Liaison serves as the
Chair, per the bylaws.
Page 8 of 18
8. Removal and Resignation
A. Removal
Commissioners serve at the pleasure of the City Council and Commissioners
shall be subject to removal by a majority vote of the City Council.
B. Resignation
A Commissioner who wishes to resign shall submit their resignation in writing
to the Staff Liaison. The resigning Commissioner shall provide as much notice
as possible.
C. Voluntary Resignation
Unexcused absence from consecutive meetings, specified in the BCC Bylaws,
shall be considered a voluntary resignation.
Previously dismissed Commissioners may be eligible for reappointment to the
BCC.
Page 9 of 18
Chapter 3. Rules of Decorum
1. At all public meetings, commissioners shall:
A. Always put the community’s interests first by making decisions with the interest
of the community at‐large in mind and avoid representing personal interests;
B. Treat each other, councilmembers, staff, and members of the public with
dignity, courtesy, and respect;
C. Not interrupt speakers or other members, allow them to finish their presentation
before asking questions;
D. Not engage in discussion with a member of the public;
E. Be attentive to others, limiting interruptions and distractions;
F. Encourage diverse viewpoints in debate while being mindful not to prolong
discourse or block consensus;
G. Agree to respectfully disagree with fellow Commissioners;
H. Keep comments clear, concise, and on‐topic;
I. Start and end meetings on time and work from the agenda;
J. Present problems in a way that promotes discussion and resolution;
K. Meet with the Council Liaison to the BCC when requested.
2. Commissioners are subject to all the provisions of the City’s Policy Against
Harassment, Discrimination and Retaliation and all other Human Resources
policies that apply to the City Council.
Page 10 of 18
Chapter 4. Meetings
1. All BCC decisions must be taken at BCC meetings. Before acting, the BCC may take
testimony from, and be provided information by, project applicants, interested
members of the public, or City staff.
2. No business may be transacted by the BCC at a regular or special meeting unless a
quorum of the membership is present. A quorum requires a majority of the total
number of Commissioners on the BCC to be present (i.e., 50% plus one of those
currently appointed).
3. Types of Meetings
A. Regular Meetings are those identified in the adopted meeting schedule.
1. BCC’s shall hold meetings at the regularly scheduled date and time for
the BCC’s meetings.
2. BCC’s shall adopt a schedule of meetings as close to December 15 as
possible on an annual basis, which shall become the regular meeting
dates of the BCC.
3. Regular meeting dates may be amended by the BCC.
B. Special Meetings are called at non‐regular meeting date and times. They are
called by the Staff Liaison with a minimum of 24 hours’ notice, versus 72 hours’
notice for regular meetings.
1. If at any time any regular meeting of the BCC falls on a holiday, if it is
known that a quorum will not be available, or if there are items of
business that require scheduling at a special meeting due to the need
to take action prior to a regular meeting or that require a meeting
devoted to the subject matter proposed for the meeting, a Special
Meeting may be scheduled to the earliest convenient time.
C. Study Sessions are meetings that are held for the purpose of providing
information to the BCC, particularly on issues that are more complex or more
time‐consuming than matters typically scheduled on regular meetings. At study
sessions Commissioners may collectively provide direction to City staff.
Typically, no action is taken at the study sessions; the public may provide
comments.
D. Closed Sessions at the BCC level would be very rare and would only occur
at the direction of the City Attorney.
E. Emergency Meetings are allowed per the Ralph M. Brown Act.
Page 11 of 18
4. Voting
A motion, second, and a vote of the BCC shall be required for any formal action of
BCC. In the absence of a contrary law, the number of votes required to take action is
a majority of a quorum.
Votes shall be called using a roll call vote where each Commissioner shall indicate
their vote verbally after their name has been called.
5. The Chair may change the order of hearing of items on the agenda.
6. Public Participation
A. All members of the public are encouraged and invited to participate in the
legislative process of the City’s BCC’s; including by submission of comments
to the Staff Liaison before the meeting or speaking in-person at the scheduled
meeting.
B. All communications addressed to Commissioners received by the Staff Liaison
or their designee are relayed to the appointed body.
C. It is the intent of these rules to allow everyone to be heard without fear of
responses that may discourage public participation. For these reasons, these
rules are taken seriously. Disruptive or unruly behavior may result in removal
from the BCC meeting.
7. Ralph M. Brown Act
All BCC meetings shall be open and public, and all persons shall be permitted to
attend any meeting of the BCC, except as otherwise provided in the Ralph M. Brown
Act relating to Closed Session (Government Code Sections 54950 et seq.). Meetings
will be accessible to all, with accommodations for accessibility issues made upon
request. Any person who disrupts the meeting may be asked to leave and be
removed.
8. Rosenberg’s Rules of Order
To the extent these Rules do not address an issue of parliamentary procedure for
legislative body meetings, Rosenberg’s Rules of Order: Simple Parliamentary
Procedures for the 21st Century shall apply.
9. Minutes
A. Decisions of BCC meetings are recorded in Action Minutes.
B. Action Minutes contain very little, if any, narrative content and do not capture
Page 12 of 18
details of public comment or Commissioner comments, questions and opinions.
The Staff Liaison is responsible for producing action minutes. Commissioners
may request correction only of factual errors when presented with the draft
minutes. No supplemental materials may be appended to minutes.
C. Media (audio/video) recordings, when employed, may be used to record the
complete minutes of the meeting including a verbatim record of meetings and
are kept as identified in the City’s Records Retention Schedule.
10. Agenda Item Submission
A. The Staff Liaison coordinates all agenda items for consideration on a given
agenda. In order to ensure that each item for discussion has been thoroughly
analyzed, a Staff Report shall be presented verbally or in writing as deemed
appropriate by the Staff Liaison.
1. The preparation of Staff Reports applies to all BCC’s in order to ensure:
i. The BCC has all the information needed to make a well‐informed
decision; and
ii. Any action is fully transparent to the public.
2. Staff Reports shall be part of the public agenda packet issued prior to
the meeting. Copies of the agenda, staff reports and supporting
materials shall be made available to the public at the meeting and online.
B. Members of the public may request an item be brought to the BCC during Open
Time at a BCC meeting, and Commissioners may contact the Staff Liaison and
request a specific topic be considered or introduced to the BCC. The Staff
Liaison sets the agenda based on department priorities and the City Council’s
goals and priorities. If a member of the public or Commissioner disagrees with
the Staff Liaison’s decision not to place an item on the agenda, they may to
contact the City Council Liaison to the BCC, the City Council by
correspondence, or by providing public comment at a City Council meeting
during Open Time.
11. Conflict of Interest
BCC’s must conduct business ethically and follow all state and local regulations,
including the Political Reform Act, Government Code section 1090 and the Ralph M.
Brown Act.
A. Whenever it appears to a Commissioner they may have a prohibited financial
interest in any City contract, or an item that may be presented to the BCC, the
Commissioner should consult with the Staff Liaison and the City Attorney at the
Page 13 of 18
earliest opportunity for advice on whether a disqualifying conflict of interest
exists.
B. If the City Attorney is consulted on such a matter, the City Attorney shall provide
their advice in writing, and shall provide a copy of their opinion to the BCC, the
Staff Liaison, and the City Clerk.
C. Commissioners shall not vote upon any matter on which they have a conflict
of interest, as determined by the Conflict of Interest Code or the City Attorney’s
Office.
D. Commissioners shall openly state the reason for their conflict of interest as
required by law or regulation.
E. Commissioners who are disqualified by a conflict of interest shall recuse
themselves from all deliberation and voting on the matter. The Commissioner
shall leave the dais and leave the room where the matter is not on the Consent
Agenda or involves deliberation by the Commissioners. The Commissioner
may return to the room and dais after final voting on the matter has occurred.
Page 14 of 18
Chapter 5. Communication
1. All communications are public records.
All letters, memoranda, and email communications involving Commissioners, the
subject of which relate to the conduct of government or the performance of any
governmental function, with certain exceptions as outlined in the Public Records Act,
are public records. Public records are subject to disclosure under the Public Records
Act.
2. Ralph M. Brown Act
Each Commissioner should be mindful of all of the requirements of the Brown Act in
communicating with each other.
3. Correspondence
A. Any correspondence from the public related to BCC business is considered a
public record that must be retained in accordance with the City’s Retention
Schedule; therefore, Commissioners should not solicit emails through their
personal email addresses but should direct the public to submit any
correspondence to staff who will distribute them to the Commissioners. If
Commissioners do receive correspondence relating to BCC business to their
personal email or home address, Commissioners shall forward all such
correspondence to the Staff Liaison.
B. Staff will not provide Commissioners personal email addresses to the public
without the Commissioner’s consent.
C. After the BCC has taken a position on an issue, official correspondence should
reflect this position. While Commissioners who may disagree with a position
are free to prepare correspondence on such issues as private citizens, City
letterhead, official BCC title, and staff support shall not be utilized.
D. City letterhead, logo, insignia and brand, as well as staff support cannot be
utilized for personal or political purposes.
4. Electronic Communication
A. All emails sent and received through the City server are subject to the Public
Records Act.
5. Social Media
A. Commissioners’ use of their personal social media to discuss governmental
business creates a public forum under the First Amendment.
Page 15 of 18
B. Therefore, Commissioners are advised not to use their personal social media
to discuss BCC or City business. Commissioners should be careful not to refer
to their official position or use their titles on their social media pages in a
manner that suggests the social media is being used to conduct governmental
business. They should consider adding disclaimers stating that the social
media is the personal page of the official, is for personal use, and does not
represent the views of the BCC or City.
C. If a Commissioner uses their social media for governmental business, they
are subject to claims under the First Amendment, and may not block
constituents from that social media, or delete, hide, or otherwise censor any
comments with which they disagree.
D. Also, Commissioners need to ensure that their interactions on social media
do not violate the Brown Act.
Page 16 of 18
Chapter 6. Selection Process
1. Reappointments, Vacancies and Appointments
A. The City Clerk’s Office manages the BCC application process. The process
begins with the Clerk contacting members who are eligible for appointment to
an additional term and determining their interest in reappointment.
B. The City Clerk recruits for all open seats utilizing multiple avenues, including
but not limited to the following: print and digital advertising, the news media,
and email networking lists to present qualified candidates to the City Council
for consideration.
C. The City Clerk receives the applications for BCC’s (preference is a minimum
of three applications sought for each seat) and agendizes a public meeting of
the City Council to interview applicants.
i. If the City Clerk receives a high volume of applications, the City Clerk
will provide the Mayor or their designee, and/or the Council Liaison with
the applications, and they will select the applicants to be interviewed by
the City Council, in collaboration with the Staff Liaison.
D. In some circumstances, applicants may be interviewed by the Council Liaison
and the Staff Liaison. In this instance, the Liaisons would recommend
appointment of an applicant or applicants, and it would be returned to the full
body of the City Council for approval. Applicants are appointed by a majority
vote of the City Council at a public meeting.
E. If the only application received is the incumbent application, staff may create a
recommendation to the City Council to approve the reappointment of the
incumbent on the Consent Calendar.
F. Unscheduled Vacancies
i. Subject to the Maddy Act (California Government Code § 54974),
whenever an unscheduled vacancy occurs a vacancy notice shall be
posted in the City Clerk’s Office and on the website., not earlier than 20
days before or not later than 20 days after the vacancy occurs. Final
appointment to the board, commission, or committee shall not be made
by the legislative body for at least 10 working days after the posting of
the notice in the clerk’s office.
ii. For such non‐routine vacancies, the announcement for new
applications is made as soon as possible in order to maintain viable
memberships on the various BCC’s.
Page 17 of 18
iii. All appointments occur in an open public meeting.
2. Commissioner Terms
A. Commissioner terms are dictated by Resolution of the City Council.
Chapter 7. Attachments
1. Attachments
A. Agenda Example and Template
B. Minutes Example and Template
C. Rosenberg's Rules of Order
D. Summary of the Ralph M. Brown Act
1
Attachment A
[BCC NAME]
[DATE] AT [TIME]
[LOCATION]
[ADDRESS], SAN RAFAEL, CALIFORNIA
AGENDA
CALL TO ORDER – [TIME]
MINUTES
1. Approve regular meeting minutes of [date]
Recommended Action – Approve as submitted
OPEN TIME FOR PUBLIC EXPRESSION
The public is welcome to address the [Commission] at this time on matters not on the agenda that
are within its jurisdiction. Comments may be no longer than [time] minutes and should be respectful
to the community.
SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS
2. Special Presentations:
PUBLIC HEARING (as necessary)
Duly noticed hearings as mandated by local, state, or federal law, providing an opportunity for public
review and comment of a proposed action by the Commission.
3. Public Hearing:
a. [Brief explanation of agenda item. Please spell out all abbreviations and be clear and concise
for the public – include recommended action]
Recommended Action – [Approve, Accept, etc.]
OTHER AGENDA ITEMS
If necessary to assure completion of the following items, the Chairperson may establish time limits for
the presentations by individual speakers.
4. Other Agenda Items:
a. [Brief explanation of agenda item. Please spell out all abbreviations and be clear and concise
for the public – include recommended action]
Recommended Action – [Approve, Accept, etc.]
STAFF LIAISON REPORT
5. Staff Liaison Report:
COMMISSIONER REPORTS
6. Other brief reports on any meetings, conferences, and/or seminars attended by the
[Commission/Committee/Board] members:
ADJOURNMENT
Any records relating to an agenda item, received by a majority or more of the Council less than 72 hours before the meeting, shall be
available for inspection online and in the [location where meeting is held] placed with other agenda-related materials on the table in
front of the [location prior to the meeting. Sign Language interpreters may be requested by calling (415) 485-3066 (voice), emailing
city.clerk@cityofsanrafael.org or using the California Telecommunications Relay Service by dialing “711”, at least 72 hours in advance
of the meeting. Copies of documents are available in accessible formats upon request. To request Spanish language interpretation,
please submit an online form at https://www.cityofsanrafael.org/request-for-interpretation/.
1
[BCC NAME]
[DATE] AT [TIME]
[LOCATION]
[ADDRESS], SAN RAFAEL, CALIFORNIA
MINUTES
Present: Chair [last name]
Vice-Chair [last name]
Commissioner [last name]
Commissioner [last name]
Commissioner [last name]
Absent: None
Also Present: [City title] [first, last name]
Alternate [first, last name]
CALL TO ORDER
Chair [first and last name] called the meeting to order at [exact time]
MINUTES
1. Approve regular meeting minutes of [date]
Commissioner [last name] moved, Commissioner [last name] seconded, to approve the minutes
of the [date] meeting.
AYES: Commissioners: [last name in alphabetical order followed by Chair]
NOES: Commissioners: [last names]
ABSENT: Commissioners: [last names]
Motion passed [5-0].
OPEN TIME FOR PUBLIC EXPRESSION
[SPEAKER NAME] addressed the Commission regarding [TOPIC].
SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS
2. Special Presentations:
a. Presentation for Department of Digital Service and Open Government
[TITLE] [FIRST & LAST NAME] gave a presentation
Speakers: [members of the public]: Jane Doe, John Doe, Alex Doe, Alexis Doe.
Staff responded to questions from the Commission/Board/Committee.
Commission/Board/Committee provided comments.
PUBLIC HEARING
3. Public Hearing:
a. 5800 Northgate Drive (Northgate Mall) –Temporary Use Permit (UP19-027) for a base
camp/staging operation area for the movie production for “13 Reasons Why” in a portion of
2
the Northgate Mall Shopping Center parking lot along Las Gallinas Ave; APN: 175-060-67;
General Commercial (GC) Zoning District; XGP XI Northgate LLC, owner; Dan Kemp (for
Paramount Television), applicant. File No.: UP19-027. Project Planner: Raffi Boloyan
Recommended Action – Adopt Resolution
[TITLE] [FIRST & LAST NAME] presented the staff report.
Staff responded to questions from the Commission.
Speakers: [members of the public]: Jane Doe, John Doe, Alex Doe, Alexis Doe.
Staff responded to questions from the Commission. The Commission provided comments.
Commissioner [last name] moved, Commissioner [last name] seconded, to approve
[ACTION].
AYES: Commissioners: [last name in alphabetical order followed by Chair]
NOES: Commissioners: [last names]
ABSENT: Commissioners: [last names]
Motion passed [5-0].
OTHER AGENDA ITEMS
4. Other Agenda Items:
a. Informational Report on City Boards and Commission Rules and Procedures
Recommended Action – Accept report
[TITLE] [FIRST & LAST NAME] presented the staff report.
Staff responded to questions from the Commission.
Speakers: [members of the public]: Jane Doe, John Doe, Alex Doe, Alexis Doe.
Staff responded to questions from the Commission. The Commission provided comments.
Commissioner [last name] moved, Commissioner [last name] seconded, to approve
[ACTION].
AYES: Commissioners: [last name in alphabetical order followed by Chair]
NOES: Commissioners: [last names]
ABSENT: Commissioners: [last names]
Motion passed [5-0].
STAFF LIAISON REPORT
5. Staff Liaison Report:
[TITLE] [FIRST, LAST NAME] reported on [TOPIC/S]
COMMISSION REPORTS
6. Commission Report:
Commissioner [LAST NAME] reported on [TOPIC/S]
ADJOURNMENT
3
Chair [LAST NAME] adjourned the meeting at [TIME].
Approved this [day] of [month] [year],
_____________________________
[Name], Staff Liaison
Rosenberg’s Rules of Order
REVISED 2011
Simple Rules of Parliamentary Procedure for the 21st Century
By Judge Dave Rosenberg
ii
MISSION and CORE BELIEFS
To expand and protect local control for cities through education and advocacy to enhance the quality of life for all Californians.
VISION
To be recognized and respected as the leading advocate for the common interests of California’s cities.
About the League of California Cities
Established in 1898, the League of California Cities is a member organization that represents California’s incorporated cities.
The League strives to protect the local authority and automony of city government and help California’s cities effectively
serve their residents. In addition to advocating on cities’ behalf at the state capitol, the League provides its members with
professional development programs and information resources, conducts education conferences and research, and publishes
Western City magazine.
© 2011 League of California Cities. All rights reserved.
About the Author
Dave Rosenberg is a Superior Court Judge in Yolo County. He has served as presiding judge of his court, and as
presiding judge of the Superior Court Appellate Division. He also has served as chair of the Trial Court Presiding Judges
Advisory Committee (the committee composed of all 58 California presiding judges) and as an advisory member of the
California Judicial Council. Prior to his appointment to the bench, Rosenberg was member of the Yolo County Board of
Supervisors, where he served two terms as chair. Rosenberg also served on the Davis City Council, including two terms
as mayor. He has served on the senior staff of two governors, and worked for 19 years in private law practice. Rosenberg
has served as a member and chair of numerous state, regional and local boards. Rosenberg chaired the California State
Lottery Commission, the California Victim Compensation and Government Claims Board, the Yolo-Solano Air Quality
Management District, the Yolo County Economic Development Commission, and the Yolo County Criminal Justice
Cabinet. For many years, he has taught classes on parliamentary procedure and has served as parliamentarian for large
and small bodies.
1
Table of Contents
About the Author ............................................................................................................ii
Introduction ....................................................................................................................2
Establishing a Quorum ...................................................................................................2
The Role of the Chair ......................................................................................................2
The Basic Format for an Agenda Item Discussion ........................................................2
Motions in General .........................................................................................................3
The Three Basic Motions ................................................................................................3
Multiple Motions Before the Body .................................................................................4
To Debate or Not to Debate ............................................................................................4
Majority and Super-Majority Votes ...............................................................................5
Counting Votes ................................................................................................................5
The Motion to Reconsider ..............................................................................................6
Courtesy and Decorum ..................................................................................................7
Special Notes About Public Input ..................................................................................7
2
Establishing a Quorum
The starting point for a meeting is the establishment of a quorum.
A quorum is defined as the minimum number of members of the
body who must be present at a meeting for business to be legally
transacted. The default rule is that a quorum is one more than half
the body. For example, in a five-member body a quorum is three.
When the body has three members present, it can legally transact
business. If the body has less than a quorum of members present, it
cannot legally transact business. And even if the body has a quorum
to begin the meeting, the body can lose the quorum during the
meeting when a member departs (or even when a member leaves the
dais). When that occurs the body loses its ability to transact business
until and unless a quorum is reestablished.
The default rule, identified above, however, gives way to a specific
rule of the body that establishes a quorum. For example, the rules of
a particular five-member body may indicate that a quorum is four
members for that particular body. The body must follow the rules it
has established for its quorum. In the absence of such a specific rule,
the quorum is one more than half the members of the body.
The Role of the Chair
While all members of the body should know and understand the
rules of parliamentary procedure, it is the chair of the body who is
charged with applying the rules of conduct of the meeting. The chair
should be well versed in those rules. For all intents and purposes, the
chair makes the final ruling on the rules every time the chair states an
action. In fact, all decisions by the chair are final unless overruled by
the body itself.
Since the chair runs the conduct of the meeting, it is usual courtesy
for the chair to play a less active role in the debate and discussion
than other members of the body. This does not mean that the chair
should not participate in the debate or discussion. To the contrary, as
a member of the body, the chair has the full right to participate in the
debate, discussion and decision-making of the body. What the chair
should do, however, is strive to be the last to speak at the discussion
and debate stage. The chair should not make or second a motion
unless the chair is convinced that no other member of the body will
do so at that point in time.
The Basic Format for an Agenda Item Discussion
Formal meetings normally have a written, often published agenda.
Informal meetings may have only an oral or understood agenda. In
either case, the meeting is governed by the agenda and the agenda
constitutes the body’s agreed-upon roadmap for the meeting. Each
agenda item can be handled by the chair in the following basic
format:
Introduction
The rules of procedure at meetings should be simple enough for
most people to understand. Unfortunately, that has not always been
the case. Virtually all clubs, associations, boards, councils and bodies
follow a set of rules — Robert’s Rules of Order — which are embodied
in a small, but complex, book. Virtually no one I know has actually
read this book cover to cover. Worse yet, the book was written for
another time and for another purpose. If one is chairing or running
a parliament, then Robert’s Rules of Order is a dandy and quite useful
handbook for procedure in that complex setting. On the other hand,
if one is running a meeting of say, a five-member body with a few
members of the public in attendance, a simplified version of the rules
of parliamentary procedure is in order.
Hence, the birth of Rosenberg’s Rules of Order.
What follows is my version of the rules of parliamentary procedure,
based on my decades of experience chairing meetings in state and
local government. These rules have been simplified for the smaller
bodies we chair or in which we participate, slimmed down for the
21st Century, yet retaining the basic tenets of order to which we have
grown accustomed. Interestingly enough, Rosenberg’s Rules has found
a welcoming audience. Hundreds of cities, counties, special districts,
committees, boards, commissions, neighborhood associations and
private corporations and companies have adopted Rosenberg’s Rules
in lieu of Robert’s Rules because they have found them practical,
logical, simple, easy to learn and user friendly.
This treatise on modern parliamentary procedure is built on a
foundation supported by the following four pillars:
1. Rules should establish order. The first purpose of rules of
parliamentary procedure is to establish a framework for the
orderly conduct of meetings.
2. Rules should be clear. Simple rules lead to wider understanding
and participation. Complex rules create two classes: those
who understand and participate; and those who do not fully
understand and do not fully participate.
3. Rules should be user friendly. That is, the rules must be simple
enough that the public is invited into the body and feels that it
has participated in the process.
4. Rules should enforce the will of the majority while protecting
the rights of the minority. The ultimate purpose of rules of
procedure is to encourage discussion and to facilitate decision
making by the body. In a democracy, majority rules. The rules
must enable the majority to express itself and fashion a result,
while permitting the minority to also express itself, but not
dominate, while fully participating in the process.
3
Ninth, the chair takes a vote. Simply asking for the “ayes” and then
asking for the “nays” normally does this. If members of the body do
not vote, then they “abstain.” Unless the rules of the body provide
otherwise (or unless a super majority is required as delineated later
in these rules), then a simple majority (as defined in law or the rules
of the body as delineated later in these rules) determines whether the
motion passes or is defeated.
Tenth, the chair should announce the result of the vote and what
action (if any) the body has taken. In announcing the result, the chair
should indicate the names of the members of the body, if any, who
voted in the minority on the motion. This announcement might take
the following form: “The motion passes by a vote of 3-2, with Smith
and Jones dissenting. We have passed the motion requiring a 10-day
notice for all future meetings of this body.”
Motions in General
Motions are the vehicles for decision making by a body. It is usually
best to have a motion before the body prior to commencing
discussion of an agenda item. This helps the body focus.
Motions are made in a simple two-step process. First, the chair
should recognize the member of the body. Second, the member
of the body makes a motion by preceding the member’s desired
approach with the words “I move … ”
A typical motion might be: “I move that we give a 10-day notice in
the future for all our meetings.”
The chair usually initiates the motion in one of three ways:
1. Inviting the members of the body to make a motion, for
example, “A motion at this time would be in order.”
2. Suggesting a motion to the members of the body, “A motion
would be in order that we give a 10-day notice in the future for all
our meetings.”
3. Making the motion. As noted, the chair has every right as a
member of the body to make a motion, but should normally do
so only if the chair wishes to make a motion on an item but is
convinced that no other member of the body is willing to step
forward to do so at a particular time.
The Three Basic Motions
There are three motions that are the most common and recur often
at meetings:
The basic motion. The basic motion is the one that puts forward a
decision for the body’s consideration. A basic motion might be: “I
move that we create a five-member committee to plan and put on
our annual fundraiser.”
First, the chair should clearly announce the agenda item number and
should clearly state what the agenda item subject is. The chair should
then announce the format (which follows) that will be followed in
considering the agenda item.
Second, following that agenda format, the chair should invite the
appropriate person or persons to report on the item, including any
recommendation that they might have. The appropriate person or
persons may be the chair, a member of the body, a staff person, or a
committee chair charged with providing input on the agenda item.
Third, the chair should ask members of the body if they have any
technical questions of clarification. At this point, members of the
body may ask clarifying questions to the person or persons who
reported on the item, and that person or persons should be given
time to respond.
Fourth, the chair should invite public comments, or if appropriate at
a formal meeting, should open the public meeting for public input.
If numerous members of the public indicate a desire to speak to
the subject, the chair may limit the time of public speakers. At the
conclusion of the public comments, the chair should announce that
public input has concluded (or the public hearing, as the case may be,
is closed).
Fifth, the chair should invite a motion. The chair should announce
the name of the member of the body who makes the motion.
Sixth, the chair should determine if any member of the body wishes
to second the motion. The chair should announce the name of the
member of the body who seconds the motion. It is normally good
practice for a motion to require a second before proceeding to
ensure that it is not just one member of the body who is interested
in a particular approach. However, a second is not an absolute
requirement, and the chair can proceed with consideration and vote
on a motion even when there is no second. This is a matter left to the
discretion of the chair.
Seventh, if the motion is made and seconded, the chair should make
sure everyone understands the motion.
This is done in one of three ways:
1. The chair can ask the maker of the motion to repeat it;
2. The chair can repeat the motion; or
3. The chair can ask the secretary or the clerk of the body to repeat
the motion.
Eighth, the chair should now invite discussion of the motion by the
body. If there is no desired discussion, or after the discussion has
ended, the chair should announce that the body will vote on the
motion. If there has been no discussion or very brief discussion, then
the vote on the motion should proceed immediately and there is no
need to repeat the motion. If there has been substantial discussion,
then it is normally best to make sure everyone understands the
motion by repeating it.
4
First, the chair would deal with the third (the last) motion on the
floor, the substitute motion. After discussion and debate, a vote
would be taken first on the third motion. If the substitute motion
passed, it would be a substitute for the basic motion and would
eliminate it. The first motion would be moot, as would the second
motion (which sought to amend the first motion), and the action on
the agenda item would be completed on the passage by the body of
the third motion (the substitute motion). No vote would be taken on
the first or second motions.
Second, if the substitute motion failed, the chair would then deal
with the second (now the last) motion on the floor, the motion
to amend. The discussion and debate would focus strictly on the
amendment (should the committee be five or 10 members). If the
motion to amend passed, the chair would then move to consider the
main motion (the first motion) as amended. If the motion to amend
failed, the chair would then move to consider the main motion (the
first motion) in its original format, not amended.
Third, the chair would now deal with the first motion that was placed
on the floor. The original motion would either be in its original
format (five-member committee), or if amended, would be in its
amended format (10-member committee). The question on the floor
for discussion and decision would be whether a committee should
plan and put on the annual fundraiser.
To Debate or Not to Debate
The basic rule of motions is that they are subject to discussion and
debate. Accordingly, basic motions, motions to amend, and substitute
motions are all eligible, each in their turn, for full discussion before
and by the body. The debate can continue as long as members of the
body wish to discuss an item, subject to the decision of the chair that
it is time to move on and take action.
There are exceptions to the general rule of free and open debate
on motions. The exceptions all apply when there is a desire of the
body to move on. The following motions are not debatable (that
is, when the following motions are made and seconded, the chair
must immediately call for a vote of the body without debate on the
motion):
Motion to adjourn. This motion, if passed, requires the body to
immediately adjourn to its next regularly scheduled meeting. It
requires a simple majority vote.
Motion to recess. This motion, if passed, requires the body to
immediately take a recess. Normally, the chair determines the length
of the recess which may be a few minutes or an hour. It requires a
simple majority vote.
Motion to fix the time to adjourn. This motion, if passed, requires
the body to adjourn the meeting at the specific time set in the
motion. For example, the motion might be: “I move we adjourn this
meeting at midnight.” It requires a simple majority vote.
The motion to amend. If a member wants to change a basic motion
that is before the body, they would move to amend it. A motion
to amend might be: “I move that we amend the motion to have a
10-member committee.” A motion to amend takes the basic motion
that is before the body and seeks to change it in some way.
The substitute motion. If a member wants to completely do away
with the basic motion that is before the body, and put a new motion
before the body, they would move a substitute motion. A substitute
motion might be: “I move a substitute motion that we cancel the
annual fundraiser this year.”
“Motions to amend” and “substitute motions” are often confused, but
they are quite different, and their effect (if passed) is quite different.
A motion to amend seeks to retain the basic motion on the floor, but
modify it in some way. A substitute motion seeks to throw out the
basic motion on the floor, and substitute a new and different motion
for it. The decision as to whether a motion is really a “motion to
amend” or a “substitute motion” is left to the chair. So if a member
makes what that member calls a “motion to amend,” but the chair
determines that it is really a “substitute motion,” then the chair’s
designation governs.
A “friendly amendment” is a practical parliamentary tool that is
simple, informal, saves time and avoids bogging a meeting down
with numerous formal motions. It works in the following way: In the
discussion on a pending motion, it may appear that a change to the
motion is desirable or may win support for the motion from some
members. When that happens, a member who has the floor may
simply say, “I want to suggest a friendly amendment to the motion.”
The member suggests the friendly amendment, and if the maker and
the person who seconded the motion pending on the floor accepts
the friendly amendment, that now becomes the pending motion on
the floor. If either the maker or the person who seconded rejects the
proposed friendly amendment, then the proposer can formally move
to amend.
Multiple Motions Before the Body
There can be up to three motions on the floor at the same time.
The chair can reject a fourth motion until the chair has dealt
with the three that are on the floor and has resolved them. This
rule has practical value. More than three motions on the floor at
any given time is confusing and unwieldy for almost everyone,
including the chair.
When there are two or three motions on the floor (after motions and
seconds) at the same time, the vote should proceed first on the last
motion that is made. For example, assume the first motion is a basic
“motion to have a five-member committee to plan and put on our
annual fundraiser.” During the discussion of this motion, a member
might make a second motion to “amend the main motion to have a
10-member committee, not a five-member committee to plan and
put on our annual fundraiser.” And perhaps, during that discussion, a
member makes yet a third motion as a “substitute motion that we not
have an annual fundraiser this year.” The proper procedure would be
as follows:
5
Motion to close nominations. When choosing officers of the
body (such as the chair), nominations are in order either from a
nominating committee or from the floor of the body. A motion to
close nominations effectively cuts off the right of the minority to
nominate officers and it requires a two-thirds vote to pass.
Motion to object to the consideration of a question. Normally, such
a motion is unnecessary since the objectionable item can be tabled or
defeated straight up. However, when members of a body do not even
want an item on the agenda to be considered, then such a motion is
in order. It is not debatable, and it requires a two-thirds vote to pass.
Motion to suspend the rules. This motion is debatable, but requires
a two-thirds vote to pass. If the body has its own rules of order,
conduct or procedure, this motion allows the body to suspend the
rules for a particular purpose. For example, the body (a private club)
might have a rule prohibiting the attendance at meetings by non-club
members. A motion to suspend the rules would be in order to allow
a non-club member to attend a meeting of the club on a particular
date or on a particular agenda item.
Counting Votes
The matter of counting votes starts simple, but can become
complicated.
Usually, it’s pretty easy to determine whether a particular motion
passed or whether it was defeated. If a simple majority vote is needed
to pass a motion, then one vote more than 50 percent of the body is
required. For example, in a five-member body, if the vote is three in
favor and two opposed, the motion passes. If it is two in favor and
three opposed, the motion is defeated.
If a two-thirds majority vote is needed to pass a motion, then how
many affirmative votes are required? The simple rule of thumb is to
count the “no” votes and double that count to determine how many
“yes” votes are needed to pass a particular motion. For example, in
a seven-member body, if two members vote “no” then the “yes” vote
of at least four members is required to achieve a two-thirds majority
vote to pass the motion.
What about tie votes? In the event of a tie, the motion always fails since
an affirmative vote is required to pass any motion. For example, in a
five-member body, if the vote is two in favor and two opposed, with
one member absent, the motion is defeated.
Vote counting starts to become complicated when members
vote “abstain” or in the case of a written ballot, cast a blank (or
unreadable) ballot. Do these votes count, and if so, how does one
count them? The starting point is always to check the statutes.
In California, for example, for an action of a board of supervisors to
be valid and binding, the action must be approved by a majority of the
board. (California Government Code Section 25005.) Typically, this
means three of the five members of the board must vote affirmatively
in favor of the action. A vote of 2-1 would not be sufficient. A vote of
3-0 with two abstentions would be sufficient. In general law cities in
Motion to table. This motion, if passed, requires discussion of the
agenda item to be halted and the agenda item to be placed on “hold.”
The motion can contain a specific time in which the item can come
back to the body. “I move we table this item until our regular meeting
in October.” Or the motion can contain no specific time for the
return of the item, in which case a motion to take the item off the
table and bring it back to the body will have to be taken at a future
meeting. A motion to table an item (or to bring it back to the body)
requires a simple majority vote.
Motion to limit debate. The most common form of this motion is to
say, “I move the previous question” or “I move the question” or “I call
the question” or sometimes someone simply shouts out “question.”
As a practical matter, when a member calls out one of these phrases,
the chair can expedite matters by treating it as a “request” rather
than as a formal motion. The chair can simply inquire of the body,
“any further discussion?” If no one wishes to have further discussion,
then the chair can go right to the pending motion that is on the floor.
However, if even one person wishes to discuss the pending motion
further, then at that point, the chair should treat the call for the
“question” as a formal motion, and proceed to it.
When a member of the body makes such a motion (“I move the
previous question”), the member is really saying: “I’ve had enough
debate. Let’s get on with the vote.” When such a motion is made, the
chair should ask for a second, stop debate, and vote on the motion to
limit debate. The motion to limit debate requires a two-thirds vote of
the body.
Note: A motion to limit debate could include a time limit. For
example: “I move we limit debate on this agenda item to 15 minutes.”
Even in this format, the motion to limit debate requires a two-
thirds vote of the body. A similar motion is a motion to object to
consideration of an item. This motion is not debatable, and if passed,
precludes the body from even considering an item on the agenda. It
also requires a two-thirds vote.
Majority and Super Majority Votes
In a democracy, a simple majority vote determines a question. A tie
vote means the motion fails. So in a seven-member body, a vote of
4-3 passes the motion. A vote of 3-3 with one abstention means the
motion fails. If one member is absent and the vote is 3-3, the motion
still fails.
All motions require a simple majority, but there are a few exceptions.
The exceptions come up when the body is taking an action which
effectively cuts off the ability of a minority of the body to take an
action or discuss an item. These extraordinary motions require a
two-thirds majority (a super majority) to pass:
Motion to limit debate. Whether a member says, “I move the
previous question,” or “I move the question,” or “I call the question,”
or “I move to limit debate,” it all amounts to an attempt to cut off the
ability of the minority to discuss an item, and it requires a two-thirds
vote to pass.
6
Now, exactly how does a member cast an “abstention” vote?
Any time a member votes “abstain” or says, “I abstain,” that is an
abstention. However, if a member votes “present” that is also treated
as an abstention (the member is essentially saying, “Count me for
purposes of a quorum, but my vote on the issue is abstain.”) In fact,
any manifestation of intention not to vote either “yes” or “no” on
the pending motion may be treated by the chair as an abstention. If
written ballots are cast, a blank or unreadable ballot is counted as an
abstention as well.
Can a member vote “absent” or “count me as absent?” Interesting
question. The ruling on this is up to the chair. The better approach is
for the chair to count this as if the member had left his/her chair and
is actually “absent.” That, of course, affects the quorum. However, the
chair may also treat this as a vote to abstain, particularly if the person
does not actually leave the dais.
The Motion to Reconsider
There is a special and unique motion that requires a bit of
explanation all by itself; the motion to reconsider. A tenet of
parliamentary procedure is finality. After vigorous discussion, debate
and a vote, there must be some closure to the issue. And so, after a
vote is taken, the matter is deemed closed, subject only to reopening
if a proper motion to consider is made and passed.
A motion to reconsider requires a majority vote to pass like other
garden-variety motions, but there are two special rules that apply
only to the motion to reconsider.
First, is the matter of timing. A motion to reconsider must be made
at the meeting where the item was first voted upon. A motion to
reconsider made at a later time is untimely. (The body, however, can
always vote to suspend the rules and, by a two-thirds majority, allow
a motion to reconsider to be made at another time.)
Second, a motion to reconsider may be made only by certain
members of the body. Accordingly, a motion to reconsider may be
made only by a member who voted in the majority on the original
motion. If such a member has a change of heart, he or she may
make the motion to reconsider (any other member of the body
— including a member who voted in the minority on the original
motion — may second the motion). If a member who voted in the
minority seeks to make the motion to reconsider, it must be ruled
out of order. The purpose of this rule is finality. If a member of
minority could make a motion to reconsider, then the item could be
brought back to the body again and again, which would defeat the
purpose of finality.
If the motion to reconsider passes, then the original matter is back
before the body, and a new original motion is in order. The matter may
be discussed and debated as if it were on the floor for the first time.
California, as another example, resolutions or orders for the payment of
money and all ordinances require a recorded vote of the total members
of the city council. (California Government Code Section 36936.) Cities
with charters may prescribe their own vote requirements. Local elected
officials are always well-advised to consult with their local agency
counsel on how state law may affect the vote count.
After consulting state statutes, step number two is to check the rules
of the body. If the rules of the body say that you count votes of “those
present” then you treat abstentions one way. However, if the rules of
the body say that you count the votes of those “present and voting,”
then you treat abstentions a different way. And if the rules of the
body are silent on the subject, then the general rule of thumb (and
default rule) is that you count all votes that are “present and voting.”
Accordingly, under the “present and voting” system, you would NOT
count abstention votes on the motion. Members who abstain are
counted for purposes of determining quorum (they are “present”),
but you treat the abstention votes on the motion as if they did not
exist (they are not “voting”). On the other hand, if the rules of the
body specifically say that you count votes of those “present” then you
DO count abstention votes both in establishing the quorum and on
the motion. In this event, the abstention votes act just like “no” votes.
How does this work in practice?
Here are a few examples.
Assume that a five-member city council is voting on a motion that
requires a simple majority vote to pass, and assume further that the
body has no specific rule on counting votes. Accordingly, the default
rule kicks in and we count all votes of members that are “present and
voting.” If the vote on the motion is 3-2, the motion passes. If the
motion is 2-2 with one abstention, the motion fails.
Assume a five-member city council voting on a motion that requires
a two-thirds majority vote to pass, and further assume that the body
has no specific rule on counting votes. Again, the default rule applies.
If the vote is 3-2, the motion fails for lack of a two-thirds majority. If
the vote is 4-1, the motion passes with a clear two-thirds majority. A
vote of three “yes,” one “no” and one “abstain” also results in passage
of the motion. Once again, the abstention is counted only for the
purpose of determining quorum, but on the actual vote on the
motion, it is as if the abstention vote never existed — so an effective
3-1 vote is clearly a two-thirds majority vote.
Now, change the scenario slightly. Assume the same five-member
city council voting on a motion that requires a two-thirds majority
vote to pass, but now assume that the body DOES have a specific rule
requiring a two-thirds vote of members “present.” Under this specific
rule, we must count the members present not only for quorum but
also for the motion. In this scenario, any abstention has the same
force and effect as if it were a “no” vote. Accordingly, if the votes were
three “yes,” one “no” and one “abstain,” then the motion fails. The
abstention in this case is treated like a “no” vote and effective vote of
3-2 is not enough to pass two-thirds majority muster.
7
Appeal. If the chair makes a ruling that a member of the body
disagrees with, that member may appeal the ruling of the chair. If the
motion is seconded, and after debate, if it passes by a simple majority
vote, then the ruling of the chair is deemed reversed.
Call for orders of the day. This is simply another way of saying,
“return to the agenda.” If a member believes that the body has drifted
from the agreed-upon agenda, such a call may be made. It does not
require a vote, and when the chair discovers that the agenda has
not been followed, the chair simply reminds the body to return to
the agenda item properly before them. If the chair fails to do so, the
chair’s determination may be appealed.
Withdraw a motion. During debate and discussion of a motion,
the maker of the motion on the floor, at any time, may interrupt a
speaker to withdraw his or her motion from the floor. The motion
is immediately deemed withdrawn, although the chair may ask the
person who seconded the motion if he or she wishes to make the
motion, and any other member may make the motion if properly
recognized.
Special Notes About Public Input
The rules outlined above will help make meetings very public-
friendly. But in addition, and particularly for the chair, it is wise to
remember three special rules that apply to each agenda item:
Rule One: Tell the public what the body will be doing.
Rule Two: Keep the public informed while the body is doing it.
Rule Three: When the body has acted, tell the public what the
body did.
Courtesy and Decorum
The rules of order are meant to create an atmosphere where the
members of the body and the members of the public can attend to
business efficiently, fairly and with full participation. At the same
time, it is up to the chair and the members of the body to maintain
common courtesy and decorum. Unless the setting is very informal,
it is always best for only one person at a time to have the floor, and
it is always best for every speaker to be first recognized by the chair
before proceeding to speak.
The chair should always ensure that debate and discussion of an
agenda item focuses on the item and the policy in question, not the
personalities of the members of the body. Debate on policy is healthy,
debate on personalities is not. The chair has the right to cut off
discussion that is too personal, is too loud, or is too crude.
Debate and discussion should be focused, but free and open. In the
interest of time, the chair may, however, limit the time allotted to
speakers, including members of the body.
Can a member of the body interrupt the speaker? The general rule is
“no.” There are, however, exceptions. A speaker may be interrupted
for the following reasons:
Privilege. The proper interruption would be, “point of privilege.”
The chair would then ask the interrupter to “state your point.”
Appropriate points of privilege relate to anything that would
interfere with the normal comfort of the meeting. For example, the
room may be too hot or too cold, or a blowing fan might interfere
with a person’s ability to hear.
Order. The proper interruption would be, “point of order.” Again,
the chair would ask the interrupter to “state your point.” Appropriate
points of order relate to anything that would not be considered
appropriate conduct of the meeting. For example, if the chair moved
on to a vote on a motion that permits debate without allowing that
discussion or debate.
1400 K Street, Sacramento, CA 95814
(916) 658-8200 | Fax (916) 658-8240
www.cacities.org
To order additional copies of this publication, call (916) 658-8200.
$10
© 2011 League of California Cities. All rights reserved.
Printed on recycled paper.
1
THE RALPH M. BROWN ACT
The “Open Meeting” Law
“In enacting this chapter, the Legislature finds and declares that the public
commissions, boards and councils and the other public agencies in this State exist to
aid in the conduct of the People’s business. It is the intent of the law that their
actions be taken openly and that their deliberations be conducted openly.
The people of this State do not yield their sovereignty to the agencies which serve
them. The people, in delegating authority, do not give their public servants the right
to decide what is good for the people to know and what is not good for them to know.
The people insist on remaining informed so that they may retain control over the
instruments they have created.” Government Code section 54950.
The Basic Legal Requirement of the Brown Act:
“All meetings of the legislative body of a local agency shall be open and public, and all
persons shall be permitted to attend any meeting of the legislative body of a local
agency, except as otherwise provided in this chapter.” Government Code section
54953(a).
A. Notice and Agenda Requirements
All meetings of a local legislative body must:
1. Be open to the public;
2. Be noticed 72 hours in advance;
3. Provide an opportunity for the public to speak;
4. Be located within the jurisdiction;
5. Not consider or take action on items not noticed on the agenda.
B. What is a “Legislative Body”?
The term “local Legislative Body” means not just the City Council, but also includes
multi-person task forces, committees and commissions established by formal action of
the City Council.
C. What is a “Meeting”?
A meeting is “…any congregation of a majority of the members of a legislative body (a
quorum) at the same time and place to hear, discuss or deliberate upon any item that is
within the subject matter jurisdiction of the legislative body or the local agency to which
it pertains.” Government Code section 54952.2(a).
2
Important: There are also some situations that do not appear to be traditional
meetings, but that will or may be considered to constitute a violation of the Brown Act.
They include the following:
1. Collective Briefings: A majority of the members may NOT meet together with
staff outside the public meeting for a collective briefing.
2. Retreats/Workshops: A majority of the members may NOT attend retreats or
workshops of the legislative body that are not noticed and open to the public
as required by the Brown Act.
3. Informal gatherings: A majority of the members may NOT continue to discuss
business after the noticed meeting formally ends.
4. Serial Meetings: A serial meeting occurs when by seriatim contact, a majority
of the members of the local legislative body discuss, deliberate or take action
on items of the body’s business, or reach a collective concurrence as to such
matters. In effect, the decision-making process of the legislative body in such
a case has occurred in private, not in a noticed, public meeting. This can
occur in several ways:
• “Daisy-Chain” meetings: Member A contacts member B who contacts
member C who contacts member D, all concerning the same item of
committee business. This produces a collective consideration or
concurrence of a quorum of the legislative body not occurring at a
noticed public meeting, in violation of the Brown Act.
• “Hub-and-Spoke” meetings: A person (citizen, staff member,
colleague) contacts each member separately. While a member of a
local legislative body may have individual contacts with constituents,
advocates, consultants, staff, news reporters or a colleague, such
contacts cannot be used to do in stages what is unlawful to do in one
step. “Individual contacts” that lead to a collective concurrence of the
legislative body are prohibited.
• Email/Text Meetings: Computer messages to, from and between
members of the legislative body that lead to a “collective
concurrence” as to issues before the body are a type of serial meeting
that violates the Brown Act. (Note: does not include emails merely to
schedule a meeting, but not discussing committee business.)
This area in particular is one which can easily lead committee
members into Brown Act violations. In order to avoid Brown Act
3
violations, staff and committee members should follow the following
rules:
• Avoid webconferencing, social media communications, or
individual communication of intended vote to third persons who
may learn of intentions of the majority.
• Committee members should avoid initiating or participating in an
email discussion of committee business with other members.
Always remember that the business of the committee is to be
done in public, at noticed meetings. Even if an email is meant to
be sent unilaterally, with no need to reply, a recipient might
choose to reply and accidentally “reply all.” While inadvertent,
this is a Brown Act violation. Outside of a public meeting, it is
best to communicate on committee business only through staff.
D. Exceptions: What is NOT a Meeting?
There are certain gatherings of a majority of the committee that will not be considered
to be meetings, such as attendance by a majority of the committee at conferences open
to the public; community meetings of another organization on topics of local community
concern (e.g. a local candidate’s night); noticed, open meetings of another local agency
(e.g. Board of Supervisors); or purely social or ceremonial events (e.g. funeral, ground-
breaking); provided that the members do not discuss among themselves, other than as a
part of the scheduled program, business of a specific nature that is within their subject
matter jurisdiction.
E. Remedies
1. Civil actions to prevent violations of the Act.
2. Criminal action against individual members who intentionally violate the Act.
3. Civil action to invalidate a legislative body’s action taken in violation of the
Act.
Conclusion
Committee members must be constantly aware of the Brown Act’s mandate that all
decision-making and collective concurrence be done in a noticed public hearing, and
not, albeit unintentionally, behind closed doors. Committee members should consult
staff any time they have a concern or question about the applicability of the Brown Act.
Page 1 of 9
POLICE ADVISORY AND
ACCOUNTABILITY COMMITTEE
AGENDA REPORT
March 19, 2025
Item 2c
TITLE: THE RACIAL IDENTITY AND PROFILING ACT (RIPA): A COMPREHENSIVE
REVIEW OF RIPA
RECOMMENDATION:
Receive the report.
BACKGROUND:
The Racial and Identity Profiling Act (RIPA) was enacted in 2015 through Assembly Bill 953,
aiming to address and eliminate racial and identity profiling in California’s law enforcement
practices. This legislation mandates all law enforcement agencies collect and report detailed data
on all vehicle and pedestrian stops, including the perceived race, ethnicity, gender, and age of
individuals stopped, as well as the reasons and outcomes of these encounters. The collected data
is submitted to the California Department of Justice and analyzed by the Racial and Identity
Profiling Advisory (RIPA) Board, which publishes annual reports with findings and
recommendations (oag.ca.gov).
As outlined by the California Code of Regulations (11 CCR § 999.224), RIPA stop data must be
collected during police contacts matching either of the following criteria: “(1) Any detention, as
defined above in these regulations, by a peace officer of a person; or (2) any peace officer
interaction with a person in which the officer searches, as defined in these regulations.”
The San Rafael Police Department (SRPD) is committed to fostering a culture of trust,
accountability, and transparency within our community. We strive to ensure fair, equitable policing
practices that uphold the rights of all individuals, regardless of race, ethnicity, or identity. Through
continuous training, community collaboration, and data-driven strategies, SRPD is dedicated to
reducing biases, improving relationships with the community, and enhancing public safety.
DISCUSSION:
Historical Context of the Racial Identity Profiling Act (RIPA)
The enactment of RIPA in 2015 was in response to growing concerns about racial and identity
profiling by law enforcement in California. High-profile incidents and community advocacy
highlighted the need for systemic reforms to ensure equitable policing practices. RIPA’s primary
objectives include explicitly banning racial and identity profiling in law enforcement activities,
requiring agencies to collect and report data on stops to identify and address disparities, and
establishing the RIPA board to oversee data analysis and recommend policy changes. Since its
implementation, RIPA has served as a tool for assessing law enforcement practices and
promoting transparency and accountability.
RIPA data for San Rafael
The following is a summary of the stop data for San Rafael in 2024. It should also be noted that
these recorded stops are combined into one category and do not separate proactive stops from
calls for service.
Page 2 of 9
In 2024, SRPD recorded 5,353 stops. Of these, 47% were perceived to be Latine(x), 39% were
perceived to be White, and 8% were perceived to be Black/African American. In just 2% (108) of
these stops, officers reported knowing the individual’s demographics before making the stop.
Individuals perceived as African American were stopped at the highest rate based on reasonable
suspicion, which occurs when officers have information-either from evidence or a report-that leads
them to contact someone. Additionally, individuals perceived as Native American, African
American, and White had the highest rates of contraband found. This happens when officers have
probable cause to search, when a person is on probation or parole, or when consent to search is
given.
In response to calls for service, individuals perceived as Native American, Pacific Islander, and
African American were stopped at the highest rates. Meanwhile, individuals perceived as White
and Native American were arrested at the highest rates following a stop.
The chart below illustrates the 2023 SRPD data in comparison to the state of California. 2024
statewide data is not currently available.
5.92%
37.85%
8.50%
2.83%
44.23%
0.35%
0.33%
5.72%
43.07%
12.14%
5.03%
31.96%
0.28%
0.57%
ASIAN
HISPANIC/LATINE(X)
BLACK/AFRICAN AMERICAN
MIDDLE EASTERN OR SOUTH ASIAN
WHITE
NATIVE AMERICAN
PACIFIC ISLANDER
Asian Hispanic/Latine
(x)
Black/African
American
Middle Eastern
or South Asian White Native
American Pacific Islander
California 5.72%43.07%12.14%5.03%31.96%0.28%0.57%
San Rafael 5.92%37.85%8.50%2.83%44.23%0.35%0.33%
2023 California vs. San Rafael RIPA Demographics
Page 3 of 9
2025 RIPA Board Recommendations
The 2025 RIPA Annual Report analyzes data from 2023 collected by California law enforcement
agencies, documenting 4,721,135 stops. The findings reveal that the largest group stopped were
individuals perceived as Hispanic/Latine(x) (43.07%), followed by White (31.96%) and Black
(12.14%). The report highlights that people perceived as Black were stopped 126.5% more often
than their proportion in the census population, while those perceived as Hispanic/Latine(x) were
stopped 43.8% more frequently. This report examines over 4.7 million stops and 14,444 civilian
complaints from 539 law enforcement agencies to assess the extent and nature of racial and
identity profiling in California. The report asserts that racial and identity profiling remains a
persistent issue. Based on the collected State of California Stop Data, the RIPA board has made
the following recommendations.
• Improving Officer Training: Mandating additional training on implicit bias, de-escalation
tactics, and cultural competency. Expanding crisis intervention training to reduce the
likelihood of escalation in encounters with marginalized communities.
o The San Rafael Police Department emphasizes de-escalation in every Use
of Force Training and Firearms Training. SRPD Policy 319.5 stipulates that all
members of the department receive POST-approved training on hate crime
recognition and investigations as provided by Penal Code §13519.6. Training
includes: (a) Recognition of bias motivators such as ranges of attitudes and
perceptions toward a specific characteristic or group, including disability bias,
gender bias, and religion bias. All SRPD personnel also complete Diversity,
Equity, Inclusion, and Belonging (DEIB) training. In addition to DEIB training,
SRPD also took part in the following training:
Has contracted with Athena Coaching to help train Sergeants and above in
Leadership and Coaching.
Emotional Intelligence training by DB Bedford
Contracted with retired Police Chief Daniel Hahn to give a class on
Procedural Justice and Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion to the leadership
team.
Strategic Communications (POST).
Use of Force-De-scalation (In-house as well as Self-Paced POST training)
Tools for Tolerance/Beyond Diversity at the Museum of Tolerance (Los
Angeles)
Crisis Intervention Training
Lexipol Daily Training Bulletins (DTBs) officers are required to complete
monthly covering topics from policy to de-escalation.
Weekly Briefing Room videos were presented during briefings, covering
topics such as de-escalation, best practices, and case law reviews.
Dispatch training that covers bias and de-escalation include:
Page 4 of 9
• De-escalation for Dispatchers
• Dispatch Priming
• Interpersonal Skills for Dispatch
• Crisis Negotiations for Dispatchers
• Tactical Dispatch Basic Concepts
• Enhancing Data Collection and Transparency: Standardizing stop data collection
practices across all agencies. Requiring more comprehensive reporting on the context of
stops and searches.
o The San Rafael Police Department is open to exploring alternative methods for
data collection. Some law enforcement agencies also gather information on
whether the officer knew the individual's race/gender prior to the stop and if the
person stopped is a local resident.
• Increasing Community Engagement and Oversight: Encouraging stronger
partnerships between police departments and community organizations. Implementing
independent boards to review stop data and recommend improvements.
o The San Rafael Police Department displays our stop data on our transparency
portal on our website and is open to recommendations from the community and
the Police Advisory and Accountability Committee (PAAC).
Mill Valley Force for Racial Equity and Empowerment (MVFREE) Recommendations
The Mill Valley Force for Racial Equity & Empowerment (MVFREE) is a community organization
dedicated to eliminating systemic racism, oppression, and identity biases in Mill Valley, California.
MVFREE focuses on uniting the community through coalition-building, education on intentional
anti-racism, empowerment to confront racism, creating spaces for BIPOC voices, and advocating
for policies that dismantle racial barriers. Their initiatives include addressing racial disparities in
policing, promoting diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) in local governance, and fostering cultural
connections between Mill Valley and neighboring communities like Marin City. They released a
report on their research on RIPA in 2022.
The 2022 MVFREE report on racial disparities in policing provided insights and several detailed
recommendations aimed at reducing racial disparities in law enforcement practices:
• Elimination of Pretext Stops: MVFREE advocates for the complete elimination of pre
• text stops, which involve minor traffic infractions being used as a pretext to investigate
other criminal activity. They argue that these stops disproportionately affect communities
of color and contribute to racial disparities in the criminal justice system. The report
suggests that law enforcement agencies adopt policies restricting the use of pretext stops
in situations where public safety is at imminent risk.
o The San Rafael Police Department does not support the elimination of Pretext
stops. The U.S. Supreme Court (Whren v. United States, 517 U.S. 806 (1996)
upheld Pretext stops as a lawful tool that allows law enforcement to establish
probable cause for an unrelated crime following the initial stop. Eliminating this
practice could result in a compromise to community safety. For a comprehensive
analysis, please refer to the PORAC review of RIPA and the definition of Pretext
Stops provided below.
Page 5 of 9
• Strengthening Accountability and Oversight: MVFREE recommends the
establishment of independent oversight committees that include community
representatives. These committees would be tasked with regularly reviewing stop data
and ensuring accountability in law enforcement practices. They also advocate for
transparent public reporting of stop data, including detailed breakdowns by race, ethnicity,
and outcome of the stop.
o The City of San Rafael has established the Police Advisory and Accountability
Committee with the goals to enhance transparency and improve trust with the
community. The Committee is invited to review SRPD stop data and make
recommendations to modify any policies or practices.
• Comprehensive Officer Training Programs: MVFREE emphasizes the importance of
ongoing, mandatory training on racial bias, cultural competency, and de-escalation
techniques. They also recommend scenario-based training that addresses common
biases and teaches officers how to mitigate them in real-world encounters.
o The San Rafael Police Department conducts regular training sessions on racial
bias, cultural competency, and de-escalation techniques. During all scheduled
department training courses, scenario-based exercises are utilized. Along with the
training already mentioned above, the department recently acquired AXON virtual
reality software, enabling more frequent and effective de-escalation training.
• Community Engagement and Dialogue: MVFREE underscores the importance of
building trust between law enforcement and communities through regular dialogue and
public forums. They recommend the development of community advisory boards that
actively participate in policymaking and training development to ensure that community
concerns are addressed.
o The San Rafael Police Department is deeply committed to fostering strong
community relationships through various outreach initiatives. A cornerstone of this
effort is the Specialized Assistance for Everyone (SAFE) Team, launched in March
2023, which addresses crises related to mental health, addiction, and
homelessness by providing emergency and non-emergency responses, as well as
proactive outreach. To enhance transparency and public trust, SRPD established
the Police Advisory and Accountability Committee (PAAC) in October 2023,
comprising diverse community members who offer recommendations on police
policies and practices. Additionally, SRPD engages residents through programs
like the Citizens Police Academy, offering an inside look at law enforcement
operations, and "Coffee with a Cop" events, facilitating open dialogues between
officers and community members. SRPD also maintains active communication
channels via social media platforms, including X (formerly Twitter), Facebook,
Nixle, and Nextdoor, to keep the public informed about arrests, crime trends, and
community outreach efforts. These initiatives reflect SRPD's dedication to building
a safer, more connected community.
Police Officers Research Association of California (PORAC) Analysis of RIPA
The Peace Officers Research Association of California (PORAC) has critically examined the
methodologies and conclusions presented in the Racial and Identity Profiling Advisory (RIPA)
Board's annual reports. In their analysis, PORAC identifies several significant flaws that may
Page 6 of 9
misrepresent the state of racial profiling in California.
• Insufficient Data Collection- PORAC asserts that the current data collection process
mandated by RIPA is inadequate for accurately assessing instances of racial profiling. The
data lacks essential contextual information, such as the specific circumstances leading to
a stop, the behavior of the individual stopped, and detailed environmental factors. Without
this context, it's challenging to determine whether a stop was influenced by racial bias or
legitimate law enforcement considerations. Dr. Brian L. Withrow, a racial profiling expert,
emphasizes that the narrow scope of data collected by the Department of Justice (DOJ)
hinders the ability to draw meaningful conclusions about law enforcement behavior.
• Misinterpretation of Statistical Data- The RIPA Board's reports often present statistical
disparities in stop data as evidence of racial profiling. However, PORAC argues that these
analyses frequently overlook alternative explanations for disparities, such as differences
in crime rates across communities, varying calls for service, or other situational factors.
By not accounting for these variables, the reports may inaccurately attribute disparities
solely to officer bias. Dr. Withrow points out that the current analytical constraints make it
nearly impossible to determine a causal relationship between an individual's identity and
the actions taken by an officer based on the available data.
• Impact on Law Enforcement Practices- PORAC expresses concern that the RIPA
Board's findings, based on potentially flawed analyses, could lead to policy decisions that
adversely affect law enforcement operations. For instance, an overemphasis on reducing
statistical disparities might pressure officers to alter their policing strategies in ways that
could compromise public safety. Additionally, the administrative burden of complying with
current data collection requirements may divert resources from essential policing
activities. PORAC advocates for a balanced approach that considers both the need for
unbiased policing and the practical realities of law enforcement.
Recommendations for Improvement
To address these issues, PORAC recommends the following actions:
• Enhance Data Collection: Expand the scope of data gathered during stops to include
comprehensive contextual information, enabling a more accurate assessment of the
factors influencing law enforcement decisions.
• Refine Analytical Methods: Incorporate a multifaceted analysis that considers various
factors contributing to statistical disparities, moving beyond a singular focus on race or
identity.
• Collaborative Policy Development: Engage law enforcement professionals in the
development of data collection and analysis protocols to ensure they are both effective
and practical.
By implementing these recommendations, PORAC believes that the RIPA Board can produce
more accurate and actionable insights, ultimately fostering fair and effective policing practices in
California.
Refining Analytical Methods
The American Society of Criminology journal Criminology and Public Policy: Analysis of "Testing
for Disparities in Traffic Stops: Best Practices from the Connecticut Model" analyzes the
challenges in analyzing traffic stops.
Page 7 of 9
The 2020 issue of the Criminology & Public Policy Journal analyzes the nuances and disparities
of comparing police stop data, specifically against census or population data and time of day. The
Connecticut Racial Profiling Prohibition Project (CTRP3) has developed a comprehensive
framework for collecting and analyzing traffic stop data to identify and address potential racial
disparities. This model is widely regarded as a best practice in the field.
The journal article highlights some of the key challenges that occur in law enforcement stop data.
Two of which are used by the California RIPA board. One of the key challenges in addressing
disparities in traffic stop data lies in the comparison between the general population and the
driving population. Traditional approaches often rely on demographic data from the Census or
other population-based metrics, assuming that the demographic composition of the population at
large reflects the driving population. However, this comparison can be misleading, as it doesn't
account for factors like driving behavior, commuter patterns, or geographic differences in traffic
patterns, all of which influence who is on the road at any given time.
The other challenge that the California RIPA board uses (or doesn’t account for) to analyze stop
data is the "Veil of Darkness" (VoD) method. The VoD method is used to study racial disparities
in traffic stops by comparing stops made during the day versus those made at night. The idea is
that race is less visible at night, so any disparities in the frequency of stops based on race are
less likely to be influenced by racial bias. Separating daytime and nighttime stops allows
researchers to more accurately assess whether racial discrimination plays a role in traffic stop
decisions, offering a clearer and more unbiased picture of law enforcement practices. In
California, the RIPA analysis combines all traffic stops, making it more challenging to measure
racial bias accurately, as the effects of darkness—such as the inability to clearly see into a car—
can obscure the true nature of the stops.
The 2020 Criminal & Public Policy Journal highlights critical challenges in the California RIPA
Board analyzing traffic stop data, particularly when comparing it to census or population data and
considering the time of day. The California RIPA board’s approach, which doesn’t incorporate the
“Veil of Darkness” method, may obscure potential racial biases by combining all stops together.
RIPA Impacts on Agencies and Officers
Chief Sean Thuilliez, 2nd Vice President of the California Police Chiefs Association and serves as
a representative on the current California RIPA Advisory Board, shared his position on RIPA and
its impacts in a letter addressed to the San Rafael Police Advisory and Accountability Committee.
In summary, Chief Thuilliez acknowledges that RIPA aims to enhance transparency and
accountability in policing by ensuring fair and unbiased stops. He further notes the following:
While these goals are vital for community trust, implementation challenges exist.
Officers face increased reporting burdens, often spending more time documenting
stops than conducting them. The interpretation of data lacks contextual nuance,
making it difficult to assess bias accurately. Additionally, officers may feel
pressured to second-guess decisions, potentially discouraging proactive policing
and impacting public safety. Balancing transparency with operational efficiency
remains a key challenge for law enforcement agencies.
Definitions and Case Law
Pretext Stops
Pretext stops occur when an officer uses a minor traffic violation as a reason to stop a vehicle
while having an unrelated, often investigatory motive. These stops are legally justified by the
minor infraction, even if the officer's underlying intent is to investigate other potential criminal
Page 8 of 9
activity.
Whren v. United States (1996)
The United States Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of pretext stops in Whren v. United
States, ruling that as long as the officer has an objectively reasonable basis for the stop (e.g., a
traffic violation), the subjective intent of the officer is irrelevant. This landmark decision effectively
sanctioned the use of pretext stops nationwide, allowing law enforcement to use minor infractions
as investigative tools.
California's AB 2733 and CVC §2806.5
In response to concerns about the potential for bias in pretext stops, California enacted Assembly
Bill 2733, which added California Vehicle Code (CVC) §2806.5. This legislation requires officers
to:
• Clearly state the reason for the stop to the individual at the outset.
• Document the reason for the stop and the outcome, including any searches conducted.
• Develop probable cause if they wish to elevate the stop to a search.
Bias by Proxy
Bias by proxy occurs when individuals rely on indirect factors or stereotypes to form judgments,
which can lead to discriminatory outcomes without direct intent. For example, a community
member may unknowingly use certain behaviors, appearances, or circumstances (such as a
person’s clothing or where they live) as proxies for assumptions about their character or
background. As a result, community members may unjustifiably call the police on someone they
perceive as suspicious based solely on these assumptions. This type of bias can reinforce
stereotypes and perpetuate systemic inequalities by influencing decisions based on perceived
associations rather than individual actions, potentially leading to unnecessary police involvement
and escalating situations unnecessarily.
SRPD addresses bias by proxy through comprehensive training for officers, records staff, and
dispatchers. This training emphasizes the importance of asking relevant, objective questions to
ensure that decisions are based on observable behavior rather than assumptions or biased
perceptions. By focusing on factual information and encouraging objective judgment, the
department works to reduce the influence of biased thinking and prevent unjustified actions based
on stereotypes or indirect factors.
COMMUNITY OUTREACH:
San Rafael Police Department is committed to promoting transparency and accountability in all
aspects of our operations, particularly in relation to traffic stop data collection and reporting. In
alignment with the California Racial and Identity Profiling Act (RIPA), we have taken proactive
steps to ensure that our community has access to vital information regarding our practices and
procedures.
One of the primary ways we ensure transparency is through the RIPA portal on the San Rafael
Police Department website. This portal serves as a central resource for sharing data and
information related to traffic stop reporting, giving the public easy access to the data we collect
and submit in compliance with RIPA requirements. Through the portal, community members can
view up-to-date reports, track trends, and gain a deeper understanding of how our department
handles traffic stops.
Page 9 of 9
FISCAL IMPACT:
None
Submitted by:
Scott Eberle
Police Lieutenant
Attachment:
1. RIPA PowerPoint Presentation by Kyle Williams, Marin County Sheriff’s
Department
AB 953Racial and Identity Profiling Act of 2015
San Rafael Police Department
Overview
•Prohibits racial and identity profiling by law enforcement.
•Requires law enforcement agencies to submit data to the Attorney General's Office.
•Establishes the RIPA Board.
•Provides data, best practices, and recommendations for law enforcement, community advocates, organizations, and policymakers to advance the goals of RIPA.
•Signed into law in 2015, agencies began collecting data in waves based on size.
Datapoints
•Time
•Date
•City (Area)
•Location (intersection)
•Actions Taken
•Basis for Search
•Any Force Related Actions Taken
•Contraband/Evidence Discovery
•Officer’s Badge Number
•Officer’s Years of Experience
•Officer’s Assignment (Patrol)
•Perceived Age
•Perceived Gender
•Perceived Sexual Orientation
•Perceived Ethnicity
•Perceived Disability
•Perceived English Fluency
•Call-for -Service
•Reason for Stop
•Result of Stop
•Perceived Unhoused
Contacts consist of:
•Consensual encounters
•Traffic stops
•5150 Holds
•Calls-for-Service
•Probation/Parole
•Probable Cause
•Reasonable Suspicion
Not Collected
•Employee Population
•Driving Population
•BOL
•Crime Trends
•Residency
•Observed demographics before initiating contact
•5,353 total stops in 2024.
•13% of San Rafael workers are residents.
•High diversity in surrounding Bay Area counties.
•2024 statewide data is not yet publicly available.
2024 Demographics
47%
39%
8%
3%
2%1%0%0%
2024 Stops by Perceived Race
Hispanic/Latine(x)
White
Black/African American
Asian
Middle Eastern or South
Asian
Multiracial
Pacific Islander
5.92%
37.85%
8.50%
2.83%
44.23%
0.35%
0.33%
5.72%
43.07%
12.14%
5.03%
31.96%
0.28%
0.57%
Asian
Hispanic/Latine(x)
Black/African American
Middle Eastern or South Asian
White
Native American
Pacific Islander
2023
California vs. San Rafael RIPA Demographics
California San Rafael
Perceived Age and Gender
73.5%
24.5%
1.3%0.8%
Perceived Gender
Cisgender Man/Boy Cisgender Woman/Girl
Transgender Man/Boy Transgender woman/Girl
128
1192
755
1329
1174
519
256
Under 18
18-25
26-30
31-40
41-50
51-60
61+
Perceived Age
•Individuals perceived to be Cisgender Men/Boys are 3
times more likely to be stopped compared to Cisgender
Women/Girls (49%/51%) population for Marin County.
•Marin County’s median population age is 48.2.
Reason for Contact
75.7%
56.4%
45.5%
62.8%
80.1%
22.4%
30.3%
42.0%
29.4%
13.0%
1.9%
13.3%
12.5%
7.9%
6.8%
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
Middle Eastern or South Asian
White
Black/African American
Hispanic/Latine(x)
Asian
Reason for Contact
Traffic Violation Reasonable Suspicion Other
•Individuals perceived to be
Black/African American were
stopped at a higher rate for
reasonable suspicion of a crime.
•67% of all stops for reasonable
suspicion were in response to a
call-for-service.
*Other includes 5150 Hold, Consensual Encounters, and Probable Cause
Search and Discovery Rates
•A higher contraband found rate
shows more productive searches.
•Perceived Middle Eastern or South
Asians showed the least productive
searches.
•Individuals perceived to be
Black/African American and White
respectively had the highest
contraband found rates.10.0%
23.4%
29.5%
23.2%
15.0%
9.3%
25.5%
33.9%
27.1%
13.7%
0.0%5.0%10.0%15.0%20.0%25.0%30.0%35.0%40.0%
Middle Eastern or South Asian
White
Black/African American
Hispanic/Latine(x)
Asian
Search and Discovery Rates
Search Rate Contraband/Evidence Found Rate
Calls For Service
•San Rafael has a higher percentage of calls
for service compared to statewide statistics.
•Overall, 26.4% of all stops were made in
response to a call for service.
•Individuals perceived to be Black/African
American were stopped at a higher rate in
response to a call for service in San Rafael.
4.4%
7.8%
12.5%
3.4%
8.7%
15.1%
24.8%
41.5%
11.2%
30.1%
0.0%5.0%10.0%15.0%20.0%25.0%30.0%35.0%40.0%45.0%
Asian
Hispanic/Latine(x)
Black/African American
Middle Eastern or South Asian
White
Calls For Service
California vs. San Rafael
San Rafael California
Result of Stop
•Individuals perceived to be White
were arrested at the highest
rate.
•Individuals perceived as
Hispanic/Latine(x) and White
respectively were cited at the
highest rate.
49.3%
35.7%
39.9%
34.1%
41.1%
34.9%
37.6%
21.6%
34.1%
6.5%
8.9%
19.9%
24.6%
35.0%
10.3%
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
50.0%
60.0%
Asian Hispanic/Latine(x)Black/African American White Middle Eastern or South
Asian
Result of Stop by Perceived Race
Warning Citation Arrest
Actions Taken 2.0%
98.0%
Were demographics observed prior to initiating the
contact?
Yes No
•The rate of actions taken is significantly lower in San
Rafael than statewide statistics.
•Individuals perceived to be Black/African American had
actions taken 37% less in San Rafael than in California.
•In only 2% (108) of stops in 2024 the officer reported
observing the demographics of the person being
stopped.0.25
0.51 0.45
0.21
0.38
0.26
0.88
0.67
0.21
0.55
-
0.10
0.20
0.30
0.40
0.50
0.60
0.70
0.80
0.90
1.00
Actions Taken
San Rafael California
The rate of actions taken in San Rafael is considerably lower compared to the statewide average.
Thank you
Kyle Williams, Data Analyst
Marin County Sheriff’s Office
K_Williams@MarinSheriff.Org