1 STAFF REPORT
DATE: January 24, 2023
TO: Justin Hess, City Manager
FROM: Kimberley Clark, City Clerk
Judie Wilke, Assistant City Manager
BY: Melissa Dekermenji, CMC, Records Manager
Viviana Garzon, MPA, Administrative Analyst II
SUBJECT: Discussion on the Invocation period at City Council Meetings
RECOMMENDATION
The City Council could:
1) N ote and file the report;
2) D irect staff to update the City Council Meeting Agenda with the removal of the invocation period; or
3) Direct staff to return with a second step staff report on a new name and updated process to replace the invocation period at Council meetings.
BACKGROUND
At the November 15, 2022, City Council meeting, then Vice Mayor Anthony requested a first step staff report on the invocation period at the start of City Council meetings.
Since 1953, the City of Burbank has had the practice of beginning each City Council meeting with an invocation period, listed at the top of the meeting agenda before the Flag Salute. During the invocation, the speaker prays for or requests for the spiritual presence of a higher power in the Council meeting. The invocation is usually given by an individual whose congregation is an active member of the Burbank Ministerial Association (Association), a non-denominational organization of clergy and representatives of other organizations. The Association maintains a list of 43 Congregations, with most of them located in Burbank (Attachment 1 ). The City’s current practice is to send the approved Council meeting schedule at the beginning of the year to the President of the Association.
CITY MANAGER’S
OFFICE
2 The President sends the list of dates to its active members and coordinates volunteers to lead the invocation at the Council meetings. Although the Association’s list includes 43 Congregations, only eight of those on the list are active members. T hese members take turns leading the invocation. The Association is in the process of updating its goals and membership requirement s since it saw a significant decline in participation after the Covid-19 Pandemic. Despite the fact that the Association’s list of active members is low, it has not resulted in a negative impact to the invocation at Council meetings. The President provides a list of volunteers (usually five meetings at a time) to the Administrative Analyst in the City Manager’s Office who places the name of the volunteer on the Mayor’s Script at each meeting. On the rare occasion that the Association does not have a volunteer, or the volunteer cannot attend the Council meeting that evening, the City’s Community Assistance Coordinator leads the invocation. Neither the City Council nor City staff have any input in determining the subject matter or content of the invocation. However, volunteers are reminded that sectarian prayer is not permitt ed by law and their words should be positive, peaceful, and uplifting.
Rubin v. City of Burbank
In 2000, Plaintiffs Irv Rubin and Roberto Alejandro Gandara brought suit against the City due to the invocation at the November 23, 1999 Council meeting. A member of the Association, who was a minister of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter -Day Saints, provided the invocation and ended his prayer with the words “ …in the name of Jesus Christ, Amen.”
Mr. Rubin and Mr. Gandara filed suit for declaratory and injunctive relief, challenging the practice of the City to begin the Council meetings with religious prayers invoking the name of Jesus Christ. After trial, the court found the prayer recited on November 23, 1999, was "sectarian" and violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. The court prohibited the City from "knowingly and intentionally allowing sectarian prayer at City Council meetings." The City was ordered to "advis e anyone conducting a prayer as part of the City Council meeting that sectarian prayers are not permitted." The City appealed the judgment and the Court of Appeal concluded that the prayer did in fact violate the Establishment Clause, which prohibits gover nment practices preferring one religion over another.
The Court noted that all legislative prayers are not prohibited by the Establishment Clause. In 1983, t he United States Supreme Court concluded in Marsh v. Chambers (Marsh), that a legislative prayer t hat was not explicitly Christian did not violate the Establishment Clause. However, in reaching its decision, the Supreme Court noted that all references to Christ had been removed from the prayers at issue. The Court of Appeal interpreted Marsh to mean that “any legislative prayer that proselytizes or advances one religious belief or faith, or disparages any other, violates the Establishment Clause.” The Court explained that the trial court’s “characterization of the invocation as ‘sectarian’ was 3 merely a definitional determination that the invocation unconstitutionally communicated a preference for one religious faith (or sect) over another.” The Court found that the prayer that invoked the name of Jesus Christ violated the Establishment Clause “because it conveyed the message that Christianity was being advanced over other religions.” The Court also concluded that requiring the City to advise the speaker conducting the prayer that sectarian prayers are not allowed does not violate the speaker’s constitutional right to freedom of speech.
Since the Court’s decision, the Council meeting agenda has included the following text after Invocation on the agenda: “The Courts have concluded that sectarian prayer as part of City Council meetings is not permitted under the Constitution.”
DISCUSSION
Many California cities have an invocation period at the start of their Council meetings.
During research, staff solicited responses from the Cal Cities City Clerks’ email listserv to survey other cities to find out which have an invocation period on their Council agenda, and what title is included on the agenda ( if it is different than “ invocation”). Staff also contacted the offices of City Clerks in other cities via telephone to gather this information.
Out of the 95 cities which responded to the survey, 48 (51%) have an invocation period and title it as such, 6 cities (6%) have an invocation period but title it differently, 3 cities (3%) have an invocation period and title it as such only during the annual Council Reorganization meeting, 36 cities (38%) do not have an invocation period, and 2 cities (2%) utilize a different title and practice on their Council meeting agenda. A full list of the cities that participated in the survey, and their response, is included as Attachment 2.
Titles other than Invocation
Six cities have an invocation period on their Council meeting agenda but use different titles for the period. For example, the City of Costa Mesa titles it “Moment of Solemn Expression,” City of Lake Elsinore titles it “Moment of Silence,” City of Morgan Hill titles it “Silent Invocation,” and the City of Santee titles it “Legislative Invocation.”
Two cities have discontinued the practice of an invocation during Council meetings, but still have a moment for positive words on the agenda. The City of Port Hueneme has a period titled “Inspirations” in which Council Members, on a rotating schedule, speak of something that inspires them. The City of Sierra Madre has a period for “Words of Inspiration” where each Council Member reads an inspirational quote or poem.
Since November 4, 2021, t he Burbank Unified School District Board of Education has included a land acknowledgment on their meeting agenda. At every meeting, after the Pledge of Allegiance, the Board of Education President will read the following text: “We 4 acknowledge the traditional, ancestral, unceded territory of the Chumash, Tongva, Fernandeño Tataviam, and First Nations on which we are learning, educating, and living.”
The City of Corona includes an invocation on their Council agendas along with the following text: “The Invocation may be offered by a person of any religion, faith, belief or non-belief, as well as Council Members. A list of volunteers is maintained by the City Clerk and interested persons should contact the Clerk for further information.”
If Council cho oses to change the title of the invocation period on the Council meeting agenda, other titles staff found that maintain the positive essence of an invocation include:
• Moment of Gratitude
• Moment of Inspiration
• Moment of Unity
• Moment of Mindfulness
• Moment of Serenity
• Moment of Reflection
• Moment of Affirmation
The titles mentioned above are simply ideas for a new title; Council Members can propose additional ideas if they choose to update the process.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
This activity has no potential for resulting in either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment, and as such, is not a “project” subject to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) 14 Cal. Code Regs § 15378.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with this report.
CONCLUSION
The invocation period has been a part of the Burbank City Council meetings since 1953.
In partnership with the Burbank Ministerial Association, the process has been successful over the years with limited oversight from staff. While most cities who replied to the survey have an invocation period on their Council meeting agendas, several other cities who responded have removed the invocation period from their agendas or replaced it with a new title and process for presenters. If Council chooses to update the name and process of the invocation period, Council must consider who will oversee the process, including maintaining a list of volunteers, scheduling the speakers, and coordinating the details for every Council meeting with staff.
5 ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 1 – List of Congregations Provided by the Burbank Ministerial Association Attachment 2 – Responses to City Survey on Invocation at Council Meetings