BY BRADEN CARTWRIGHT
Daily Post Staff Writer
The city of Palo Alto is trying to assert a last-minute defense against a lawsuit from six police officers who are suing the city over a Black Lives Matter mural in front of City Hall that depicted a convicted cop killer.
The city is relying on the First Amendment, arguing that the mural was a forum for public art, so the city cannot and did not restrict what the 16 artists painted in each letter.
“Palo Alto exercised minimal oversight of the content of the mural,” attorney Suzanne Solomon said for the city.
Altering the painting of Assatta Shakur, who killed a New Jersey state trooper in 1973, would’ve amounted to censorship and a violation of the artist’s rights to free speech, Solomon said.
New argument a few years late
But the police officers filed their lawsuit three years ago, and the city didn’t make this argument until February. The city has previously argued that the mural wasn’t offensive to a reasonable person and that the police officers didn’t suffer because of it.
In response, the officers said the painting caused them to have depression, anxiety and sleepless nights. They “feared daily that they would be targeted, attacked or threatened at work because they are non-African-American police officers,” their lawsuit said.
Judge Evette Pennypacker tentatively ruled on May 28 that she wouldn’t allow the city to make the First Amendment argument at this point in the case.
Solomon filed a motion on Tuesday asking Pennypacker to schedule a hearing on June 20 to reconsider.
Council discusses lawsuit
Palo Alto City Council discussed the lawsuit in a 90-minute closed session on Monday, but had no reportable action.
The case is scheduled to go to trial on July 29.
Elise DeMarzo, Palo Alto’s public art director for 10 years, said in a declaration that she reviewed a proposal from Oakland-based artist Cece Carpio in June 2020.
Her proposed sketch included a depiction of a woman with an afro hairstyle, and the words, “We must love each other and support each other,” DeMarzo said.
Who was that?
DeMarzo said she didn’t know the painting was of an actual person, and none of the text indicated who the woman was.
“I reviewed the sketches for family-friendliness in accordance with the terms of the artists’ contracts, and to ensure they did not include corporate logos, nudity or foul language,” DeMarzo said. “I did not reject any of the sketches proposed by the selected artists, nor did I request that they be modified in anyway.”
Initially, the police union told City Manager Ed Shikada the painting of Shakur created a hostile workplace and asked him to take it down.
“The violent, intimidating and offensive content of the workplace speech is overwhelming,” said Sgt. Antony Becker, then president of the Palo Alto Peace Officers’ Association, a police union.
Mural followed by social justice program
The mural was removed in November 2020. The city now has a residency program that pays social justice-minded artists to create public art.
Six officers filed the lawsuit: Eric Figueroa, Michael Foley, Robert Parham, Julie Tannock, David Ferreira and Chris Moore.
Sad and completely predictable. Once the issue was raised the city could have taken quick action to remove it or ask that part of the mural be altered. Offensive actions go both ways.
The odd thing is this was on a city street for vehicle traffic and the group painting the mural weren’t even Palo Alto residents. Hopefully a lesson learned. In addition for civil leaders if your workforce isn’t proud to be working for the organization they will go elsewhere and you’ll spend more time dealing with issue after issue along with funds to hire replacements which don’t just come over night.
I am surprised the city is still fighting this.
Side note – support your local businesses. They need your support these days more than you know.
Oh my!
Art offended someone (again)?
We can’t allow that!
Burn it!
Ban it!
Or – these silly plaintiffs could just grow up…
At the time council allowed this mural, progressives were rioting and burning down buildings in the name of George Floyd. Council wanted to be part of it. They put on their twitter that it was time to defund the police. And they cut five police positions in June 2020. Council deserves to get sued. Too bad each of them aren’t being held personally liable.
The police have depression, anxiety and sleepless nights. They “feared daily that they would be targeted, attacked or threatened.
The police have signed up for very difficult job. They’re well aware of the risk they take in order to serve the community.
I’ll bet these officers don’t even live in this community.
“The painting of Shakur created a hostile workplace.”
This is so disingenuous.
They are hired to manage community crime! If they have a problem with stress and coping with their job they should take up a different career! They sound like a bunch of crybabies looking for a way to get money from the city.
The painting is a inanimate object! If they have this much fear, they should not be serving as an officer of the Palo Alto PD. The nature of the job has its inherent risks. It is unacceptable that they would take this position given the nature of their job. Social media has a much more prolific influence on how communities might react to their local law enforcement. Maybe they should have a psychological analysis in regards to their fears and perceptions. if this is the case that they want to argue, I feel they should be removed from the police department as they are not a viable competent personal capable executing law enforcement functions in a fair and safe reasonable fashion. They should be removed from the force for psychological deficiencies. They put our community at risk if they are threatened by inanimate objects cause them to quake in their boots based on hypothetical situations they conjure up in their head.
These are not the quality police officers our community deserves.
Our community leaders should stand up to to these officers who have little tolerance for expression of ideas with freedom of expression in all its forms.
What a bunch of crybabies!
Go take a job somewhere else.
If they are intimidated by art, how they can stand up to criminals? They are trying to drain the resources of the city they are sworn to protect. Get rid of these embarrassing losers: Eric Figueroa, Michael Foley, Robert Parham, Julie Tannock, David Ferreira and Chris Moore
I never knew that the city had a public art director. Just what does she do that takes up 1800 hours per year?
The officers work in a city that’s known to target good police work, like Ofc DeStefano’s arrest of the probationer with a long criminal history at Happy Donuts or Ofc Enberg’s dog bites….if it involves minority suspects. Having a picture of a cop killer sanctioned by that same city, in front of the police station, is the issue. We all know the meltdown that would occur if a picture of Trump went up….
Ofc DeStefano’s is a bully!! His please tactics are questionable in that moment. Public art and freedom of expression is what was sanctioned. Not the cop killer. The picture of the cop killer was a mosaic of our diverse society expressing virtues and shortcomings of human beings that live in a diverse community such as ours. The police should work on maintaining a proper mindset and attitude for doing their job in our community. While protecting our constitutional rights. When someone crosses the line they should investigate thoroughly and honestly instead of the half ASS methods I’ve known them to implement.