Redwood City defends mural removal

“The temporary painting on Broadway was in keeping with the city’s policy statements and was an expression of values the city has endorsed many different times. As a government agency, the city is able to make such statements as government speech which is different from creating a forum where individuals can make statements about their political beliefs, regardless of the content of their opinion,” said Stevenson Diaz. 

The statement counters sentiments expressed by Maria Rutenburg, a local real estate lawyer who requested the city allow the erection of a “MAGA 2020” mural, in reference to President Donald Trump’s re-election slogan. She proposed the counter-mural be done in similar fashion and also displayed on Broadway. Rutenburg’s request was denied and the “Black Lives Matter” removed due to potential traffic concerns. 

Rutenburg said on July 19, she believed Courthouse Square had turned into the epicenter for political discourse within the county and she was interested in expressing her perspective as well. She added she never requested for the mural’s removal and felt she had received most of the blame for a decision made by the city. 

Stevenson Diaz said during the remote meeting she hopes all who engaged with the city on the “Black Lives Matter” mural continue to participate in making positive change. She also spoke to the mixed responses from community members in regards to the mural. 

“There was confusion about whether this was a temporary or permanent display, whether we’d be allowing art on the street on an ongoing basis and whether we were closing the street to vehicle traffic. As a result the painting was removed,” said Stevenson Diaz. “We’ve heard from many in our community regarding the painting. Some individuals really appreciated it and are unhappy that it was removed. Others shared their disappointment that it was printed in the first place and [the city was] told they are glad that it was removed.” 

During the meeting, multiple public speakers spoke in dissent of the city’s decision and expressed displeasure in the structure of upcoming virtual town halls on local policing, organized by city officials in partnership with the Peninsula Conflict Resolution Center, a communication and dispute resolution nonprofit based in San Mateo.

Concerns included issues with limiting the number of participants allowed per session and the number of sessions planned. Currently, the city has announced six sessions with a maximum participation of 80 individuals. Interested participants are only allowed to register for one two-hour session. 

“There are lots of different perspectives in our community about the “Black Lives Matter” movement, policing and racial justice. At this critical time in our country’s history, I believe the most important work we can do vocally is to create opportunities to listen to each other regarding our experience and to carefully consider ways of policing and all city services can work better for everyone regardless of race or any other ways that we may be defined,” said Stevenson Diaz. 

In other business, the council approved two policies focused on council governance. The first mandates councilmembers govern with citywide considerations rather than by district. The rule is intended to prevent confusion for future council decisions following the first district-based elections held in the city this November. 

After the election, some councilmembers will have been elected by a city vote while the new councilmembers will be elected by a limited district vote. Data collected during the U.S. 2020 Census will also potentially affect the district map, ultimately encouraging the city to hold off on district specific guidelines. 

The second governing policy approved was a mandate to keep appointments to commissions and committees at a citywide level, instead of making appointments based on where the appointee resides. Councilwoman Giselle Hale said she would like the council to still consider the area an individual resides when making appointments to limit the number of appointees from the same neighborhood governing on any given body. 

The council also unanimously approved an item implementing new environmental criteria for development reviews, aligning with state guidelines to lower greenhouse gas emissions. The measure would replace the Level of Service analysis with a Vehicle Miles Traveled assessment which gauges how many trips and miles an individual car may travel. 

A Level of Service review assesses the effect of an individual infrastructure change and may not detect the ultimate effect on traffic by a development. The review will still be used for some proposed development plans but will no longer be required within a California Environmental Quality Act, a state required review. 

All consent items were also approved, including a $733,178 measure improving Jefferson Avenue and Cleveland Street. The contract for the project, held by the Oakland-based contracting company Gruendl Inc. Dba Ray’s Electric, could potentially increase by 10% for a maximum contract value of $806,495.80. 

“I’m excited to see this finally happen. This has been a situation in our city that has been worrisome especially for our families with children who have to cross Jefferson Avenue and it’s such a dangerous road to cross,” said Councilwoman Alicia Aguirre who pulled the item to comment on it.