Modesto approves up to $349K to defend ACLU lawsuit over mask ban at protests
The Modesto City Council approved on Tuesday allocating up to $349,500 to defend against the American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California’s lawsuit challenging the city’s ban on masks at protests.
The vote was 6-1 with Councilmember Chris Ricci as the sole dissenting vote. Asked by The Bee about his vote, Ricci said he could not comment on it due to the ongoing litigation.
The item was pulled from the consent calendar. It was grouped with another item that increases the agreement amount with a different law firm for other representation.
“Once again, Modesto leaders have chosen to support an unconstitutional ordinance despite strong community opposition,” said Chessie Thacher, senior staff attorney at the ACLU, in a statement to The Bee. “Last night, residents urged the council to invest in parks, housing and street repair instead of spending good money on bad policy. But the council chose to dedicate nearly $350,000 to defending an ordinance that stifles free speech and makes it harder for reporters to safely do their jobs. If the city won’t stand up for its residents’ rights, then the ACLU will.”
Thirteen individuals spoke during public comment, saying the litigation could have been entirely prevented had the city just repealed the ordinance. Instead, the city is becoming an ACLU test case, they said.
“I never want to hear that there’s no money ever again,” said Gavin Bruce, referring to other projects or proposals the city may not be able to afford.
Anthony Drobnick brought a makeshift giant check for negative $349,000 to present to the city during the meeting. “Cost me two bucks at the Dollar Store — a lot cheaper than the mess you made for us,” he said. “But what I wish I could give you is a reality check, except I can’t give you that because you do not listen to us.”
According to the staff report, Modesto had entered into a legal services agreement with Sacramento law firm Meyers Nave on July 28, 2025, for legal advice and assistance in relation to the city’s public assembly ordinance for up to $35,000.
The city reached that limit, so on Oct. 29 increased the budgeted amount to $95,000 to support continued services. On Feb. 25, the city increased the agreement again to $99,500 to pay final invoices.
The ACLU filed its lawsuit a month later against Modesto and Police Chief Brandon Gillespie over the city’s “unconstitutional ordinance.”
This third budget amendment now means the city will be paying the firm up to $349,000 to “amend the scope of services to include litigation defense and trial counsel.” The money comes from the city’s general fund.
A case management conference for the ACLU lawsuit has been set for July 27 at the Stanislaus County Superior Court at 2 p.m in Department 21.
Councilmember Eric Alvarez said while he respects those who speak up at the meetings, he represents the silent majority in his district that elected him to keep neighborhoods safe, protect businesses, maintain order and be a responsible steward of taxpayer dollars.
He said the drop in crime and gang activity that Modesto has been seeing lately is a result of the city’s investment in public safety. “Public safety is not theoretical. For District 2 residents, it is a lived experience. It’s hard-earned progress, and it’s something that we have responsibility to protect,” Alvarez said.
Modesto and firm go back
Meyers Nave had drafted the public assembly ordinance over which the city is now being sued.
This came after the National Straight Pride Coalition applied for a permit to hold a rally in Modesto, which the firm stated created “a crisis that caused local controversy, national debate and international news coverage.”
Under the ordinance, bringing items such as a bike helmet, wearing a bandana or carrying protective gear like a padded vest or gas mask to a protest can be classified as a misdemeanor, punishable by up to six months in jail.
The firm said the ordinance forestalled “the violence that accompanied straight pride events in other cities.”
Public outcry began after the No Kings and ICE Out protests last June, when five masked demonstrators were arrested. It was the first time the ordinance was enforced.
Although the charges later were dropped, community members continued to press the City Council to repeal the ban, citing the right to protest anonymously and raising concerns about mass surveillance, doxxing and retaliation.
The city’s Community Police Review Board formally recommended that the city manager repeal the ordinance. A community survey showed a majority of residents supported the ordinance, although more than half were unaware of it.
The ACLU and First Amendment Coalition also sent multiple letters to the city, threatening legal action if the ordinance was not amended or repealed. The City Council did amend the ordinance, in a unanimous vote in December, with some slight revisions, presented by an attorney from Meyers Nave.
The updates clarified the exceptions to the face-covering ban, which include costumes with “an expressive message,” specified which types of helmets are barred and outlined when umbrellas are allowed at demonstrations.
The ACLU stated that the amendments made the ordinance worse.
Veronica Ambrose, who was director of the Central Valley Pride Center, or MoPride, in 2019, said that when the straight pride rallies were planned, all the community wanted was for city and county leaders to denounce the hate in Modesto.
“Instead, we were infringed upon our First Amendment rights,” Ambrose said.
This story was originally published April 8, 2026 at 12:46 PM.
