East Palo Alto's City Council meeting on May 5 drew dozens of opponents of a proclamation related to antisemitism. (Courtesy Mark Dinan)
East Palo Alto's City Council meeting on May 5 drew dozens of opponents of a proclamation related to antisemitism. (Courtesy Mark Dinan)

After years of local governments voting on condemnations of Israel and calls for a ceasefire in Gaza, a small city on the Peninsula passed a proclamation this week that links the demonization of the Jewish state with antisemitism. 

By a vote of 3-2 on Tuesday, East Palo Alto became the first Bay Area city to formally adopt the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s (IHRA) definition of antisemitism — part of a city proclamation of its commitment to combat hatred of Jews. 

The effort was spearheaded by East Palo Alto Mayor Webster Lincoln, who told J. that he felt inspired to show support for the small Jewish community in his city after attending a roundtable about antisemitism for Northern California mayors in March.

The proclamation was not received lightly at the city council meeting, where dozens of attendees who spoke during the public comment period criticized the mayor’s choice to use the IHRA definition as a guide for the city’s policies and training. 

Commenters who spoke against the proclamation argued that it will be used to suppress pro-Palestinian speech by blurring the line between antisemitism and criticism of Israel — a charge that has been leveled for years in public debates about the IHRA definition.

Lincoln did not share these concerns.

“You can criticize the state of Israel and their actions, but you can’t advocate and be supportive of hate crimes here and against innocent Jewish Americans,” he told J.

A Silicon Valley city of some 30,000 residents, East Palo Alto is nearly two-thirds Latino though historically was predominantly Black. It has no synagogue or organized Jewish life, and none of the city’s elected leaders is Jewish. 

East Palo Alto Councilmember Carlos Romero, who voted against the proclamation, expressed support for the general sentiment of the proclamation but recommended that the city council choose a different definition as a reference instead. 

“The right for people to criticize state actions, not the people in Israel, but state actions, should be sacrosanct,” Romero said at the meeting. “Any definition that potentially puts that right in danger should be rejected — not as a rejection of Jews around the world, Jews in this country, or a rejection of Israel.”

Romero did not respond to J.’s requests for comment. 

Lincoln and Councilmember Mark Dinan said at the meeting that the IHRA definition is not legally binding and that the city does not intend to chill pro-Palestinian speech. 

“The use of the IHRA Working Definition of Antisemitism as an educational and analytical tool does not infringe upon rights protected under the First Amendment,” the proclamation reads. 

The IHRA defines antisemitism, in part, as an expression of “hatred toward Jews,” such as “calling for, aiding, or justifying the killing or harming of Jews.” Along with the definition, the IHRA offers several examples, some of which relate to statements about Israel, such as “claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor” and “drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.” The IHRA definition specifically excludes “criticism of Israel similar to that leveled against any other country.” 

Dinan told J. he would not have been opposed to considering a different definition but felt the differences between them are too small to justify a revision to the proclamation.

“We could have gone with another framework. [The IHRA definition] is the one in front of us, though,” he said. “I don’t think you want to make the perfect the enemy of the good.”

Lincoln said he specifically chose to adopt the IHRA definition when he learned about it during the March roundtable in Palo Alto for Northern California mayors. The event was facilitated by the Combat Antisemitism Movement, a nonprofit coalition of organizations and activists working to “safeguard Jewish life,” according to its website. 

During the roundtable, Lisa Katz, Combat Antisemitism Movement’s chief government officer, led a session on the different definitions of antisemitism and how to distinguish protected speech from targeted harassment. 

“I’m so proud of Mayor Lincoln and the council members who voted to adopt the IHRA definition,” Katz told J. “You can’t fight something if you can’t name it and define it. The fact that they did this shows such leadership and courage, and I hope that other cities in the Bay Area will follow their lead and adopt this definition.”

The proclamation was passed during Jewish American Heritage Month, which the East Palo Alto City Council also formally recognized at the meeting.

Lincoln told J. he saw the IHRA proclamation as a symbolic gesture “to say that we stand with our Jewish American brothers and sisters, just like we stand with our Palestinian American brothers and sisters. And we should start loving each other, and not promoting hate in any form.”

East Palo Alto was one of over two dozen cities in Northern California that passed a ceasefire resolution following the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas attack on Israel that started the Israel-Hamas war. Some resolutions were even-handed, calling on both sides to stop fighting. Many were aimed solely at Israel. At the vast majority of those meetings, public comments were filled with extreme criticism of Israel.

In April 2024, East Palo Alto’s city council approved a resolution calling for a ceasefire. Before the city council voted, members agreed to add a clause recognizing the Oct. 7 attack and calling for a release of the hostages held in Gaza, East Palo Alto Today reported

East Palo Alto is only one of a handful of cities across the state to adopt IHRA’s definition. In the past eight years, at least four Southern California cities –– Los Angeles, West Hollywood, El Cajon and San Diego –– passed similar measures. As of January, more than 130 cities, counties, states and other government entities in the United States passed measures that adopted the IHRA definition, according to the Combat Antisemitism Movement. 

In June 2025, San Francisco passed a resolution condemning antisemitism and “all forms of race and religion based violence” but did not explicitly reference the IHRA definition. 

J. covers our community better than any other source and provides news you can't find elsewhere. Support local Jewish journalism and give to J. today. Your donation will help J. survive and thrive!

Niva Ashkenazi is a J. staff writer through the California Local News Fellowship.