A proposed working definition of Islamophobia goes before the San Diego City Council on Tuesday, offering city officials an educational framework for identifying anti-Muslim hate while affirming religious freedom and civil rights. The proposal is Item 330 on the council's 2 p.m. discussion agenda. It does not create a new criminal offense, civil penalty or enforcement authority.
The timing is inseparable from the May 18 shooting at the Islamic Center of San Diego. Mayor Todd Gloria described the attack that day as a violent act of hate at a house of faith and learning and thanked police, fire-rescue personnel and other responders. The council docket presents the definition as one response to both that attack and longer-running discrimination faced by Muslim residents.
City materials cite a 2026 Muslim Belonging Survey from UC San Diego's U.S. Immigration Policy Center. Among Muslims surveyed in San Diego County, 88 percent reported feeling less safe in their community, 74 percent said concern for their personal safety had increased because they are Muslim, and nearly two-thirds reported discrimination tied to their Muslim identity during the previous year. Almost half worried that threats against Muslims were not taken seriously.
Those percentages describe the survey respondents, not every Muslim resident in the county. The city's summary does not provide the sample size, recruitment method or margin of error, and the publication listing should be read with those limits in mind. The figures still explain what the resolution is designed to address: a reported loss of belonging and confidence that extends beyond acts meeting the legal definition of a hate crime. A working definition can guide training, public statements and community education, but its wording matters. Definitions adopted by public institutions often prompt questions about whether criticism of a religion, a government or a political movement could be mistaken for hostility toward people. The agenda summary says the San Diego measure is an educational tool and pairs it with commitments to religious liberty and civil rights. The final resolution text and council debate will determine how explicitly those boundaries are drawn.
Existing law remains separate. San Diego's open-data description defines hate crimes as criminal acts or attempted acts motivated by bias based on protected characteristics including religion. Police investigate conduct under state and federal law; a council resolution expresses policy and intent. That distinction means adoption would not by itself change charging standards, evidence requirements or the rights of a person accused of a crime.
The council can approve, amend, continue or reject the item. Public comment and the roll-call vote will show whether members agree on the language as well as the goal. If adopted, the practical test will come after the ceremony: which departments use the definition, whether staff receive guidance, how complaints are routed and what public reporting allows residents to judge the city's response.
Tuesday's docket turns a community's fear into a choice for the city's legislative body. The resolution cannot repair the harm from the May attack or guarantee safety at a mosque, school or workplace. It can establish what the council is willing to name, and it can assign city institutions a standard against which their training and future actions may be measured.