When the HRC sent the MAPA Report to the City Council for approval, one of the HRC members wrote a dissenting opinion, as is his right. Astonishingly, the Human Relations Committee, a group that is supposed to help minority groups, decided to NOT include that minority opinion. Here, in full, is that dissenting opinion. With permission of the author.
To Davis City Council,
As a Commissioner on the HRC, I believe it is important to provide you with my minority opinion regarding the “Report on MAPA Climate & Experiences in Davis” recently approved by the HRC.
At first glance, the report appears to simply document feelings of concern and alienation among members of the MAPA community and recommends that the City of Davis, DJUSD, and UC Davis demonstrate solidarity and provide training on anti-MAPA bias. On the surface, this seems like a straightforward and unobjectionable request from an oppressed and marginalized community.
However, a closer reading reveals a very different and deeply troubling narrative. The report does not document systemic discrimination against MAPA community members across Davis institutions. Rather, it focuses overwhelmingly on allegations of harassment by individuals identified as ‘Zionists’. The implicit — and at times explicit — message throughout the report is that Zionism is equated with fascism, and that Zionist individuals have no legitimate place in the Davis community.
It is important to clarify what Zionism actually represents. Zionism is the belief that the Jewish people, like all other peoples, have the right to self-determination in their ancestral homeland, the Land of Israel (Eretz Israel). It is a movement rooted in the pursuit of safety, dignity, and national liberation for Jews following centuries of persecution, displacement, and genocide. To demonize Zionism is to deny a fundamental aspect of Jewish identity and to delegitimize Jewish aspirations for freedom and security.
The deeper grievance expressed is not merely about experiences of discrimination, but about the failure of city leadership to renounce Zionism and those who identify as Zionists.
This concern is not speculative. A simple word search of the report shows that terms related to Zionism (“Zionism,” “Zionist,” “Zionists”) appear 15 times, while terms related to antisemitism (“antisemitism,” “antisemitic,” “antisemite”) appear 36 times. Yet antisemitism is consistently framed not as a genuine threat to Jewish residents, but as a manipulative tool used to suppress advocacy for Palestinian rights.
Throughout the document, Zionists are described in terms that are inflammatory and dehumanizing. For example, the report refers to “angry Zionists” as being responsible for “relentless bullying” at community events, while describing Zionist faculty and community members as instigators of harassment against peaceful protestors. In one striking passage, the report claims “the reason is clearly Zionist intimidation and the cowardice of others to stand up to Zionist fascism,” implying that supporting Zionism — a fundamental aspect of Jewish identity for many — is equivalent to endorsing fascist oppression.
Moreover, the report repeatedly accuses Jewish and Zionist organizations, such as Aggies for Israel and Hillel, of “surveillance and harassment” simply for attending public events and recording protests — activities that are lawful and constitutionally protected. No distinction is made between harassment and legitimate disagreement or counter-demonstration, and Zionist students and faculty are consistently portrayed as aggressors who should be marginalized or excluded from civic participation.
Even more concerning is the way the report frames antisemitism itself. Rather than recognizing antisemitism as a distinct and dangerous form of hatred, the report repeatedly characterizes accusations of antisemitism as “weaponization,” suggesting that Jewish concerns about antisemitism are bad-faith attempts to silence advocacy. For example, one section reads: “accusations of antisemitism have deterred people from speaking about Palestine” — without acknowledging that some forms of anti-Zionist rhetoric do cross the line into antisemitism, such as denying Jewish people the right to national self-determination.
Rather than serving as a constructive call for inclusion and healing, the report too often reads as a politicized document that divides our community, erases legitimate Jewish experiences, and demands ideological conformity. It demands not only solidarity with the MAPA community, but effectively the rejection of Zionist Jews as legitimate members of the Davis community. That is not a position I can endorse, nor one I believe reflects the values of equity, inclusion, and pluralism that Davis aspires to uphold.
It is disheartening that the Human Relations Commission — the very body entrusted to champion diversity, pluralism, and inclusion — rejected my request to submit a formal minority opinion alongside the MAPA report. A commission committed to the ideals of fairness and open dialogue should embrace the existence of legitimate differences of opinion, not attempt to suppress them. My views reflect the concerns of many Davis residents who believe in standing against discrimination of all kinds, without erasing or demonizing entire communities.
I therefore urge the City Council to reject the Davis MAPA report and to reject the divisive and false narrative it seeks to advance.
The report does not reflect the full reality of Davis, nor does it offer a path forward rooted in true solidarity and respect for all communities.
Instead, I encourage the Council to commit to broader and more inclusive dialogue — dialogue that affirms the dignity, fears, and aspirations of all residents, including Jews, Zionists, MAPA community members, and everyone who calls Davis home.
Respectfully,
Amir Kol
Commissioner, Davis Human Relations Commission
Davisite 