A TUMULTUOUS Richmond City Council meeting on Wednesday ended with a failed attempt to censure Mayor Eduardo Martinez after he shared posts on social media last month that councilmembers said were antisemitic. The council instead approved Martinez’s own atonement plan.
Martinez is under fire for several posts he made on LinkedIn in the aftermath of the December terrorist attack that targeted a Hanukkah celebration at Australia’s Bondi Beach, killing 15 people. Martinez reposted and “liked” content that characterized the attack as a false flag and promoted antisemitic conspiracy theories.
Soon after, the Bay Area chapter of the Jewish Community Relations Council demanded his resignation. The JCRC is an organization that advocates for the interests of the local Jewish community.
Martinez issued an apology in response, saying that at the time he didn’t “fully read and understand the meaning” of what he was reposting.
At Tuesday’s meeting, there were two competing agenda items surrounding the issue.
Councilmembers Jamelia Brown and Cesar Zepeda crafted a resolution to formally condemn antisemitism and Martinez’s posts and formally censure Martinez. It also required him participate in antisemitism trainings and acknowledge that his actions constituted antisemitic conduct.
“It needs to be solidified where the council stands on antisemitic rhetoric being spread by our local official,” Brown said at the meeting. “I really think that if we’re going to be serious about condemning hate, our actions must meet that seriousness.”
Martinez instead proposed his own “restorative process” that required him to participate in an educational training on antisemitism, meet with Richmond Rabbi Julie Saxe-Taller at least two times in the first quarter of the year, and issue a public apology at a City Council meeting and in a local newspaper.
But the City Council did not get to these agenda items until four hours into the meeting. Zepeda and Brown tried to move the items to the beginning of the meeting, but the other council members declined.
At 9 p.m., Martinez’s agenda item went first.
Martinez read out an apology letter, but he introduced it with a statement that elicited an angry reaction from several audience members.
“It’s difficult to apologize, not because one is insincere, but because there are people who are not ready to accept an apology,” he said.
He acknowledged that it was a mistake to share the posts and recognized that they caused harm.
“I reposted content online that included antisemitic tropes and conspiracy theories, which have long been used to dehumanize Jewish people and justify violence against them,” he said. “I was wrong to share them, and I take full responsibility for the harm I caused. I regret the content I reposted, and I am deeply sorry.”
Crowd clashes over mayor’s response
Public comment afterward lasted for more than an hour.
Supporters of his approach argued that his atonement plan is sufficient, saying Martinez has made progress in trying to alleviate the harm that his posts potentially caused.
“We need the opportunity for the mayor to redeem himself through learning and correcting his ways,” said meeting attendee Mark Loy. “In this way, we take measure of his foul statements, and he acknowledges this by doing the serious tasks to heal his relationship with the Jewish community. In this way, we strengthen our city, Mayor Martinez becomes a better person, and we make clear that anti-Jewish statements are not tolerated.”
Those in favor of the censure said that Martinez’s plan is not enough and discussed how his posts may have caused harm to the Jewish community.
“I do support the censure,” said Elizabeth Grassetti, a member of Temple Beth Hillel in Richmond. “Harm was done by your actions. It made me personally consider how safe I am going to my synagogue.”
During public comment, hecklers from both sides yelled in disagreement with speakers. Attendees waved signs that read “People power from Richmond to Palestine” and “Censure Mayor Martinez.” Several attendees had to be removed from the meeting for being disruptive.
After public comment for Martinez’s agenda item, the council had less than 30 minutes to discuss and take a vote since the meeting had to end by 11 p.m.
Given the time constraints, Zepeda tried to amend Martinez’s agenda item by combining it with aspects of his censure item. The council voted against it in a split decision, with councilmembers Soheila Bana, Martinez, Claudia Jimenez, and Sue Wilson voting ‘no.’
Martinez’s original agenda item as it was written was passed, with Zepeda and Brown voting ‘no.’
There was no time left to go through Zepeda and Brown’s separate agenda item that included the censure. It was moved to a future meeting.
Brown voiced her frustrations that the council did not censure Martinez at the meeting.
“This is a complete embarrassment,” she said. “We stand in solidarity and say that this was antisemitic conduct and behavior, yet we don’t want to formalize it and put it on record. It’s very coward behavior.”