TO:
Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
THROUGH:
Bruce Moe, City Manager
FROM:
Alexandria Latragna, Policy and Management Analyst
SUBJECT:Title
Consideration of a Resolution of Apology for the City’s Role in the Racially Motivated Condemnation of Properties at Bruce’s Beach (City Manager Moe).
(Estimated Time: 1 Hr.)
A) DISCUSS AND PROVIDE DIRECTION
B) ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 23-0037
Line
_________________________________________________________
Recommended Action
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council discuss and provide direction and consider adopting Resolution No. 23-0037 apologizing for the City’s role in the racially motivated condemnation of the properties at Bruce’s Beach in the 1920s.
Body
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
There are no fiscal implications associated with the recommended action.
BACKGROUND:
The City of Manhattan Beach created the Bruce’s Beach Task Force to further research and properly acknowledge the City’s racially motivated eminent domain action to dispossess Willa and Charles A. Bruce, Major George and Mrs. Ethel Prioleau, Elizabeth Patterson, Mary R. Sanders, Milton and Anna Johnson, as well as others, of their property in the 1920s. The Task Force and the History Advisory Board (a subcommittee of the Task Force) drafted the attached History Report and subsequently the City Council adopted revised plaque language that was installed at Bruce’s Beach Park earlier this year. On April 6, 2021, the City Council adopted the attached Statement of Acknowledgment, Condemnation, and Empathy Regarding Bruce’s Beach.
DISCUSSION:
On March 21, 2023, Councilmember Lesser, seconded by Councilmember Howorth, requested that Councilmember Napolitano’s previously submitted resolution of apology be placed on the agenda for future consideration.
Staff suggests two minor edits to Councilmember Napolitano’s original resolution of apology which is presented as Resolution No. 23-0037 (attached):
1. The first paragraph previously listed John McCaskill, Elzia Irvin, and James and Lula Slaughter. These families owned property south of 26th Street near the location of the properties acquired through eminent domain, but were not part of the eminent domain proceedings. The History Report states that they were subjected to racial discrimination and harassment during the 1920s, therefore, it is suggested in redline to move these names to paragraph 2;
2. Paragraph “2” that previously read, “The role that the City played by tolerating racial discrimination and harassment by City residents that went unpunished, causing terror and intimidation among the Black community” was changed to “The role that the City played by tolerating racial discrimination and harassment by City residents that went unpunished, causing terror and intimidation among the Black community, including residents John McCaskill, Elzia Irvin, James and Lula Slaughter.”
Since the Council last considered this in 2021, a number of government entities in California have issued formal apologies for historical injustices against Black, Indigenous, or other people of color. Some recent examples of government entities in California adopting formal apologies include:
• The City of Santa Monica: On November 15, 2022, the Santa Monica City Council adopted a Statement Apologizing to Santa Monica's African American Residents and Their Descendants.
• The City and County of San Francisco: On February 1, 2022, the Board of Supervisors of the City and County of San Francisco adopted a resolution apologizing to Chinese immigrants and their descendants for systemic and structural discrimination, targeted acts of violence and atrocities; and committing to the rectification and redress of past policies and misdeeds.
• The City of San Jose: On September 28, 2021, the San Jose City Council adopted a resolution apologizing to Chinese immigrants and their descendants for the role of the City of San Jose in systemic and institutional racism, acknowledging acts of fundamental injustice, recognizing the contributions and resilience of the Chinese community and resolving to rectify the lingering consequences of past discriminatory policies.
• The City of Antioch: On May 18, 2021, the Antioch City Council adopted a resolution (embedded in the hyperlinked article) apologizing for the acts of racism against Chinese residents in the 1870s, and agreed to establish a Chinese historic district and provide funding for the planning and design of potential Asian museum exhibits and murals.
• The City of Santa Ana: On May 17, 2022, the Santa Ana City Council adopted a resolution to apologize to Chinese immigrants and their descendants for acts of fundamental injustice and discrimination, seeking forgiveness, and commit to the rectification of past policies and misdeeds.
Staff recommends that the City Council discuss and provide direction and consider adopting Resolution No. 23-0037 apologizing for the City’s role in the racially motivated condemnation of the properties at Bruce’s Beach in the 1920s.
PUBLIC OUTREACH:
After analysis, staff determined that public outreach was not required for this issue.
LEGAL REVIEW:
The City Attorney has reviewed this report and determined that no additional legal analysis is necessary.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution No. 23-0037
2. Bruce’s Beach History Report
3. Statement of Acknowledgment, Condemnation, and Empathy Regarding Bruce’s Beach