In the days after the Sacramento City Council passed a Gaza cease-fire resolution, some Jewish and Muslim community members are criticizing what they say was a drawn-out, non-inclusive process resulting in a flawed final result.
Some organization representatives say the city took a step in the right direction by passing a ceasefire resolution, despite raising issues with the language, while others say the city shouldn’t have taken a stand on an international issue.
Yassar Dahbour is chair of Palestine American League and co-founder of the Sacramento Regional Coalition for Palestinian Rights. He told CapRadio that when community members first approached the city to discuss a ceasefire resolution about four months ago, less than 10,000 Palestinians had been killed. Now, more than 30,000 are dead and thousands more are unaccounted for, according to the Health Ministry in Gaza.
“The anger that was brewing in the room, it is justified,” Dahbour said of the protests before the vote on March 19. “I don't agree about the incivility of some of the remarks that took place. But the anger, the sentiment, the frustration — the responsibility for that lies on the mayor himself.”
Sometime before the vote, Dahbour participated in a meeting with Mayor Darrell Steinberg, the Jewish Federation of the Sacramento Region and the Jewish Community Relations Council. But Dahbour said after he requested that a resolution include a call for Palestinian liberation and conditions on funding for Israel, he was not invited to the next meeting.
On March 19, Dahbour was among the 50 public commenters who expressed support for a cease-fire resolution but suggested amendments or asked officials to wait until Council member Mai Vang could be present at a meeting. Out of 79 people who gave public comments before the city ordered the public to clear the chambers, they made up the majority. Only 13 people urged the council to pass the resolution as it was proposed, according to a CapRadio tally of the roughly three-hour-long public comment period.
Amendments people requested included removing language supporting a two-state solution and adding a condemnation of Israel’s starvation and hospital bombing tactics. But the council only made two technical changes: amending a reference to Israeli hostages from hundreds to more than 100 and updating the reference to Palestinians killed from 25,000 to over 25,000.
“When you're talking about a genocide, a massacre, you cannot appease both sides,” Dahbour said. “You cannot appease the side that is there to root for the victimizer and those who are trying to defend the victims.”
In an interview immediately after passing the resolution, Steinberg told reporters he had no regrets.
“I'm going to do my very best to treat people with respect, to listen to people and insist that our community dialogue be civil and that people try to listen to one another,” he said. “And where there are wounds, deep wounds like the kind between our interfaith communities, especially post Oct. 7, to do everything in my power to help bring people back together again.”
Steinberg added that he thought it was rude how some pro-Palestine protesters called him by his first name and shouted during the meeting.
“I don't care how angry you are,” Steinberg said. “I don't care how righteous you think your cause is. You respect other people's points of view and that's the way you make change in this society and that's the way you win people over.”
‘No moral authority’
Although some Jewish community members and the Sacramento Valley/Central California chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) backed the resolution, Steinberg didn’t win over the Jewish Federation of the Sacramento Region and the Jewish Community Relations Council. Both formally opposed the resolution, despite being involved in meetings Steinberg convened.
“There's been a massive uptick in both anti-Semitic and Islamophobic events nationwide, and they're not quelled by a resolution that will have no impact on the outcome of the war between Israel and Hamas,” said Marion Leff, co-president of the federation. “Nor is it the business of our City Council, and it should be left to those with expertise in foreign matters.”
But others in the Jewish community disagreed on whether the city of Sacramento passing a cease-fire resolution was meaningful. Among them is Sara Smith-Silverman, an activist with Jewish Voice for Peace Sacramento. While the organization wanted to see stronger language, they said through the resolution, the capital city of California addresses a humanitarian crisis.
Smith-Silverman added that the approved resolution doesn’t recognize genocide, apartheid and occupation, nor does it make it clear how the U.S. government is funding the Israeli military. The final version calls for a cease-fire with conditions, they said.
“I think [the resolution] was the product of flawed negotiations that weren't representative of the communities who have been very active,” Smith-Silverman said. “Including Jewish folks who are very critical of the state of Israel and what it's doing to the people of Gaza and many Palestinian, Muslim and Arab-American activists who were not invited to the negotiations.”
Steinberg didn’t ask Jewish Voice for Peace to join the negotiations, which lacked transparency, Smith-Silverman said. But he did invite the Jewish Federation and the Jewish Community Relations Council, which Smith-Silverman said are conservative and support Israel’s actions in Gaza.
“They have proven that they have no moral authority,” Smith-Silverman said. “They are standing on the wrong side of history, and they do not represent the Jewish community.”
Leff said the organization represents the greater Jewish community, but recognizes that it isn’t monolithic or homogenous. She added the members of the federation and relations council have varied opinions.
“I think it's unfair to say that it's not representative,” Leff said. “You can't bring everybody into the room for such a discussion. And we went back to our communities and we heard more, and then we went back and furthered our conversation. And that's when we recognized we could not accept a compromise.”
Steinberg as well as Basim Elkarra, Executive Director of the local CAIR, also described the resolution as a compromise. In an interview on CapRadio’s Insight with Vicki Gonzalez, Elkarra said he made it clear he had issues with parts of the language.
“We had to find a way to get Sacramento on the record to support a permanent ceasefire,” Elkarra said. “Was there compromise? Yes. And there was compromise on all sides.”
Other California cities that have passed cease-fire resolutions include Davis, San Francisco, Oakland, Richmond, Cudahy and Ojai.
