A proposed ordinance regulating the use of face coverings in Stockton is moving forward to a full city council vote after the Legislation and Environmental Committee decided to unanimously forward the measure for consideration.

If adopted, the ordinance would amend the Stockton Municipal Code to make it unlawful for anyone to wear a “face-covering ski mask” in public when the intent is “to conceal their identity in a way that provokes fear, intimidation, threats, or violence.” The measure includes exceptions for medical, religious, occupational, and cultural uses of face coverings

During a June council meeting, Vice Mayor Jason Lee held up suspect sketches and described a broad-daylight graduation-day holdup of an eighth-grader wearing a money lei. 

“We are a community right now where an eighth-grader was robbed … in broad daylight by people with ski masks on,” Lee said.

The push mirrors a national trend of cities revisiting mask laws in the wake of rising safety concerns and post-pandemic norms. Stockton officials cited Philadelphia’s “Concealed Identities” ordinance — first enacted in 2000 and updated in 2023 — as a model. The Philadelphia law prohibits masks in schools, parks, and public transit, carrying fines of up to $2,000. City staff say adopting a similar framework would “help balance community safety with individual rights.”

Vice Mayor Lee and Councilmembers Mario Enríquez and Michele Padilla approved the motion.

Crime data and enforcement concerns

According to the Stockton Police Department, roughly one in four robberies since 2023 involved a suspect wearing a face covering; 31% in 2023, 26% in 2024, and 28% so far in 2025. However, police raised concerns earlier this year about how such a law would be enforced and whether it could overlap with constitutionally protected speech or lawful mask use, city documents say.

During Monday’s committee discussion, Captain Anabel Morris of the Stockton Police Department said the department’s approach is about “protecting the community but doing so in a responsible way to ensure their rights are also protected, so we are looking at it from both perspectives.”

In response to those concerns, city staff removed language suggesting an “increase” in mask-related crimes, clarifying instead that the ordinance addresses observed criminal patterns rather than a statistical rise.

Public implications

If approved by the full council, the ordinance would authorize the Stockton Police Department to issue citations, confiscate masks used unlawfully, and allow business owners to deny entry to individuals violating the rule. Violations could result in criminal prosecution or a $1,000 administrative penalty, with appeal rights under city code.

Padilla asked police how they planned to enforce the ordinance. Captain Morris said it already aligns with the state Penal Code, noting that enforcement would only apply if a person is involved in a crime or displaying suspicious behavior that meets the ordinance’s criteria.

Morris said the department’s initial focus would be on education and outreach rather than punishment, sharing information on social media, answering public concerns, and helping residents understand the new rules before enforcing them.

During public comment, Pat Barrett, a longtime community advocate, voiced support for the measure, arguing that there’s little reason for residents to wear ski masks in Stockton.

“They should not be worn unless you have a reason,” Barrett said. “We don’t get snow or blizzards like New York. We’re literally here in the Valley — there’s no need to wear a mask unless it’s a COVID mask.”

The City Council is expected to take up the ordinance in the coming weeks. If passed, it would take effect 30 days after adoption.