2. On December 2, 2024, Councilmember Mary Solorio agendized an item to discuss Sanctuary City policies. Councilmember Solorio tabled the agenda item to a future date pending a presentation by the San Fernando Police Department regarding local immigration enforcement policies.
3. On January 21, 2025, Councilmember Patty Lopez agendized an item to discuss the City co-sponsoring a public forum on immigration enforcement. The City Council deferred the request to be considered as part of the February 3, 2025 City Council meeting discussion to be included with the Police Department's public safety presentation.
4. On February 3, 2025, Police Chief Fabian Valdez provided a presentation to the City Council regarding the Police Department’sroles and responsibilities as it relates to California’s Senate Bill 54, the “California Values Act”. The City Council directed staff to return to a future meeting with additional information to potentially partner with other organizations, including non-profits and State and Federal elected officials, to host an immigration forum at a city facility.
5. On February 18, 2025, Vice Mayor Mary Solorio agendized an item to discuss the potential for San Fernando to adopt a Sanctuary City status. The City Council directed staff to return to a future meeting with additional examples of Sanctuary City policies in other cities, a matrix identifying the City’s current immigration policies and provisions implemented by other surrounding cities (e.g. cities of Los Angeles and Burbank), and information on federal funding received by San Fernando.
6. On March 17, 2025, staff provided information regarding hosting an immigration forum or resource fair at a City facility and City Council created an Ad Hoc Committee (Councilmembers Fajardo and Lopez) to work with staff to develop recommendations to City Council for hosting an immigration event in San Fernando.
ANALYSIS:
A sanctuary city refers to a designation adopted by some cities or local jurisdictions where local law enforcement and government agencies limit their cooperation with federal immigration authorities, particularly regarding the detention and deportation of undocumented immigrants.
These policies vary by city but generally aim to foster trust between immigrant communities and local government, encourage crime reporting regardless of immigration status, and prioritize local resources for community policing rather than federal immigration enforcement. Sanctuary city policies do not prevent federal immigration authorities from operating in those areas but reduce local involvement in federal immigration actions.
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 502 of 651
Discussion and Consideration to Declare Sanctuary City Status
Immigration has influenced San Fernando’s culture, economy, and community dynamics over time with a significant number of residents having immigrant roots. The various resolutions and City Council actions over the years demonstrates a commitment from the City Council to support immigration reform and advocate for the rights of immigrants and highlight the City’s consistent stance on immigration issues and the protection of immigrant communities.
State Immigration Laws.
While considering local immigration policies, it is important to understand California state law that applies to local immigration enforcement.
California Values Act (Senate Bill 54) - Effective January 1, 2018, SB 54 is a state law that restricts local law enforcement’s ability to cooperate with federal immigration authorities, except in cases involving serious or violent crimes. As a California municipality, San Fernando is subject to SB 54, which specifically prohibits local law enforcement from using resources to investigate, question, detain, detect, or arrest individuals for immigration enforcement purposes. This includes:
• Inquiring into an individual’s immigration status.
• Detaining an individual based on a federal immigration authority hold request. • Providing information regarding a person’s custody release date or responding to requests for notification by providing release dates or other information unless that information is available to the public.
• Providing personal information about an individual, including, but not limited to, home address or work address unless that information is available to the public. • Making or intentionally participating in arrests based on civil immigration warrants. • Participating in immigration enforcement activities, such as sweeps or acting as immigration agents.
Immigrant Worker Protection Act (Assembly Bill 450, 2017) – AB 450 prevents employers from sharing personal information about employees with federal authorities or allowing access to the workplace without first ensuring that authorities have secured the appropriate court documents.
Wage Theft Prevention Act (Assembly Bill 291, 2021) – AB 291 prohibits landlords from using a person’s immigration status or perceived status against them in cases of disputes over rent, living conditions, or other relative matters. A tenant may seek enforcement under this provision through civil court action. The City’s Housing Division may also be involved in this process by providing information to tenants/landlords and connecting them to LA County resources.
The City’s compliance with existing state laws, including SB 54, does not violate any existing federal laws.
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 503 of 651
Discussion and Consideration to Declare Sanctuary City Status
San Fernando Immigration Policies.
Police Department
The San Fernando Police Department’s (SFPD) Policy No. 413 (Attachment “A”) incorporates SB 54 guidelines and restrictions. Per SFPD policy, San Fernando Police Officers MAY NOT:
• Inquire into a person’s immigration status.
• Detain individuals based on U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) holds. • Share personal or release date information (unless publicly available or the individual has certain criminal convictions) with another agency.
• Assist with civil immigration warrants or warrantless searches. • Transfer individuals to immigration authorities without a judicial warrant.
SFPD does not currently participate in any joint federal task forces. Agencies in joint federal task force are required to submit an annual report to the Department of Justice detailing task force activities, including arrests related to immigration enforcement.
Other City Procedures
• San Fernando does not ask for or collect immigration status on any applications, including, but not limited to, applications to be a City Commissioner, city employment, planning/building/construction permits, or encroachment permits. • San Fernando does not ask about immigration status to establish a water/sewer account or to obtain a business license certificate.
• San Fernando does not ask about immigration status for facility rental applications or to inquire about services at the Business and Community Resource Center.
Actions by Surrounding Cities
Other jurisdictions in California that have taken action to designate themselves as sanctuary cities/counties include Berkeley, Long Beach, Oakland, San Diego, San Francisco, and Santa Ana.
Nationally, major cities that have acted include Chicago, Denver, New York City, Seattle, and Washington D.C. Below is a summary of recent ordinances/resolutions/policies adopted by other cities in the San Fernando Valley Council of Governments followed by a matrix highlighting the various provisions:
• City of Los Angeles - In November 2024, the LA City Council approved an ordinance officially designating LA as a sanctuary city (Attachment “B”). The ordinance prohibits city resources, including property or personnel, from being used for immigration enforcement.
• County of Los Angeles - In September 2020, the County Board of Supervisors approved a motion permanently banning warrantless transfers of individuals in custody of the LA County Sheriff’s Department to immigration authorities (Attachment “C”).
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 504 of 651
Discussion and Consideration to Declare Sanctuary City Status
• City of Burbank – In February 2025, the Burbank City Council adopted a resolution strengthening and expanding the City’s commitment to a welcoming, safe, and inclusive community for all, regardless of immigration status (Attachment “D”). This resolution extended the requirements of SB 54 and existing Burbank Police Department Policy restricting the use of resources for, and limiting cooperation with, immigration enforcement to apply to all City personnel and resources through a Citywide policy. • City of Glendale - In March 2017, the Glendale City Council adopted a resolution affirming a statement by the Chief of Police regarding the detention of individuals based on immigration status (Attachment “E”). This resolution affirmed that the Glendale Police Department does not have the authority nor the responsibility to incarcerate or detain individuals solely based on immigration status.
• City of Pasadena – In March 2017, the Pasadena City Council adopted a resolution enhancing safety, refuge and equal opportunity for all (Attachment “F”). This resolution affirmed that Pasadena will not enforce federal immigration laws, the City Manager will ensure that all City policies are consistent with the resolution, and the Pasadena Police Department does note investigate and prosecute violations of federal immigration laws, among other things.
Resolution/Policy Provisions City of LA
County
of LA Burbank Glendale Pasadena
San
Fernando
Adopted "Sanctuary City" status? Yes No No No No TBD
Adopted Immigrant Protections via Resolution/Policy? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes PD may not inquire about immigration status. PD may not detain based on federal immigration (ICE)
hold request.
PD may not provide information re: custody release date unless publicly available.
PD may not assist with civil immigration warrant or
warrantless searches.
PD may not participate in immigration enforcement
activities.
Prohibits access to and use of City/County property to
immigration authorities w/o judicial warrant or probable cause.
Prohibits all personnel from providing access to City data re: immigration status to ICE Agent w/o judicial warrant or order.
Prohibits all personnel from collecting immigration
status, unless required by law.
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 505 of 651
Discussion and Consideration to Declare Sanctuary City Status
Compliance with Federal, State, and Local Laws
City officials and employees, including public safety employees, are required to take an oath to uphold the Constitution and the laws of the United States. Current state laws, along with Police Department policies and practices, align with the United States Constitution and federal immigration laws. However, implementing an ordinance or resolution that prohibits employees from following the law may create a conflict in legal obligations. Employees could be required to break the law and their sworn oath to maintain their employment with the City. This scenario could subject employees to potential legal suit as well as criminal prosecution.
BUDGET IMPACT:
The City Council directed staff to provide information on federal funding received by San Fernando. The City receives one-time and ongoing federal funding to support various programs, services, and capital improvement projects. Below is a table identifying current activities supported by federal funding:
Funding Source Amount Description
Community Development Block
Grant (CDBG) $200,000
Annual allocation used to support economic
development, small business support, and
neighborhood beautification efforts.
(annual)
National Endowment for the
Arts (NEA) $50,000
Annual grant that supports the City’s
Mariachi Master Apprentice Program.
(annual)
Urban Area Security Initiative
(UASI)
$141,466
(2023)
$223,062
(2024)
2023 – SFPD security cameras and parking
lot security project. (one-time)
2024 – Applied for cybersecurity and
building access control improvements. (onetime)
Substance Abuse and Mental
Health Services Administration
(SAMHSA)
$757,583
Funding for mental health clinicians to
support police officers, residents, and the
City’s unhoused population. (one-time)
Community Oriented Policing
Services (COPS)
$360,000
$108,218
a) Funding for Community Outreach Officer
(one-time)
b) Mental wellness for SFPD personnel &
families. (one-time)
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 506 of 651
Discussion and Consideration to Declare Sanctuary City Status
Department of Justice (DOJ) $21,892 Bulletproof vest partnership. (one-time) Highway Safety Improvement
Program (HSIP) $1.5 million Traffic light upgrades along Truman Ave. (one-time) American Rescue Plan Act
(ARPA) Coronavirus State and
Local Fiscal Recovery Funds
$5.8 million One-time funding for economic recovery
from COVID-19 pandemic. (one-time)
Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA) $250,000
Applying for one-time grant funding to
complete a required update to the City’s
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP). (onetime)
CONCLUSION:
It is recommended that the City Council discuss and provide direction regarding Sanctuary City status for the City of San Fernando.
ATTACHMENTS:
A. SFPD Policy No. 413
B. City of Los Angeles Ordinance No. 188441
C. County of Los Angeles Motion
D. City of Burbank
E. City of Glendale
F. City of Pasadena Resolution
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 507 of 651
Policy
413
San Fernando Police Department
San Fernando PD Policy Manual
Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2025/01/02, All Rights Reserved.
Published with permission by San Fernando Police
Department
Immigration Violations - 1
Immigration Violations
413.1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE
The purpose of this policy is to provide guidelines to employees of the Department relating to immigration and interacting with federal immigration officials. 413.1.1 DEFINITIONS
The following definitions apply to this policy (Government Code § 7284.4):
Criminal immigration violation - Any federal criminal immigration violation that penalizes a person’s presence in, entry, or reentry to, or employment in, the United States. This does not include any offense where a judicial warrant already has been issued.
Immigration enforcement - Any and all efforts to investigate, enforce, or assist in the investigation or enforcement of any federal civil immigration law, including any and all efforts to investigate, enforce, or assist in the investigation or enforcement of any federal criminal immigration law that penalizes a person's presence in, entry or reentry to, or employment in the United States.
Judicial warrant - An arrest warrant for a violation of federal criminal immigration law and issued by a federal judge or a federal magistrate judge.
413.2 POLICY
It is the policy of the Department that all employees make personal and professional commitments to equal enforcement of the law and equal service to the public. Confidence in this commitment will increase the effectiveness of this Department in protecting and serving the entire community and recognizing the dignity of all persons, regardless of their national origin or immigration status. 413.3 VICTIMS AND WITNESSES
To encourage crime reporting and cooperation in the investigation of criminal activity, all individuals, regardless of their immigration status, must feel secure that contacting or being addressed by members of law enforcement will not automatically lead to immigration inquiry and/or deportation. While it may be necessary to determine the identity of a victim or witness, employees shall treat all individuals equally and not in any way that would violate the United States or California constitutions.
413.4 IMMIGRATION INQUIRIES PROHIBITED
Employees of this Department shall not inquire into an individual’s immigration status for immigration enforcement purposes (Government Code § 7284.6). 413.4.1 CALIFORNIA LAW ENFORCEMENT TELECOMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM (CLETS) Employees shall not use information transmitted through CLETS for immigration enforcement purposes except for criminal history information and only when consistent with the California Values Act (Government Code § 15160).
ATTACHMENT "A"
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 508 of 651
San Fernando Police Department
San Fernando PD Policy Manual
Immigration Violations
Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2025/01/02, All Rights Reserved.
Published with permission by San Fernando Police
Department
Immigration Violations - 2
Employees shall not use the system to investigate immigration violations of 8 USC § 1325 (improper entry) if that violation is the only criminal history in an individual's record (Government Code § 15160).
413.4.2 CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES
Employees shall not obtain, access, use, or otherwise disclose noncriminal history information maintained by the DMV for immigration enforcement (Vehicle Code § 1808.48). 413.5 DETENTIONS AND ARRESTS
An officer shall not detain any individual, for any length of time, for a civil violation of federal immigration laws or a related civil warrant (Government Code § 7284.6).
An officer who has a reasonable suspicion that an individual already lawfully contacted or detained has committed a criminal violation of 8 USC § 1326(a) (unlawful reentry) that may be subject to an enhancement due to a previous conviction of an aggravated felony under 8 USC § 1326(b) (2), may detain the person for a reasonable period of time to contact federal immigration officials to verify whether the United States Attorney General has granted the individual permission for reentry and whether the violation is subject to enhancement (Government Code § 7284.6). No individual who is otherwise ready to be released should continue to be detained only because questions about the individual’s status are unresolved.
If the officer has facts that establish probable cause to believe that a person already lawfully detained has violated 8 USC § 1326(a) and the penalty may be subject to enhancement due to prior conviction for specified aggravated felonies, he/she may arrest the individual for that offense (Government Code § 7284.6).
An officer shall not detain any individual, for any length of time, for any other criminal immigration violation of federal immigration laws (Government Code § 7284.6).
An officer should notify a supervisor as soon as practicable whenever an individual is arrested for violation of 8 USC § 1326(a).
413.5.1 SUPERVISOR RESPONSIBILITIES
When notified that an officer has arrested an individual for violation of 8 USC § 1326(a), or under the authority of a judicial warrant, the supervisor should determine whether it is appropriate to (a) transfer the person to federal authorities, or (b) transfer the person to jail.
Upon determination by the supervisor that a transfer referred to in subsections (a) and/or (b) above is appropriate, the supervisor shall notify and obtain approval of the applicable Division Commander before effecting such transfer.
413.6 FEDERAL REQUESTS FOR ASSISTANCE
Absent an urgent issue of officer safety or other emergency circumstances, requests by federal immigration officials for assistance from this Department should be directed to a supervisor. The supervisor is responsible for determining whether the requested assistance would be permitted under the California Values Act (Government Code § 7284.2 et seq.)..
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 509 of 651
San Fernando Police Department
San Fernando PD Policy Manual
Immigration Violations
Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2025/01/02, All Rights Reserved.
Published with permission by San Fernando Police
Department
Immigration Violations - 3
413.7 INFORMATION SHARING
No employee of this Department will prohibit, or in any way restrict, any other employee from doing any of the following regarding the citizenship or immigration status, lawful or unlawful, of any individual (8 USC § 1373; Government Code § 7284.6):
(a) Sending information to, or requesting or receiving such information from federal immigration officials.
(b) Maintaining such information in Department records. (c) Exchanging such information with any other federal, state or local government entity.
Nothing in this policy restricts sharing information that is permissible under the California Values Act.
413.7.1 IMMIGRATION DETAINERS
No individual should be held based solely on a federal immigration detainer under 8 CFR 287.7 (Government Code § 7284.6).
Notification to a federal authority may be made prior to release of an individual who is the subject of a notification request only if the individual meets one of the following conditions (Government Code § 7282.5; Government Code § 7284.6):
(a) The individual has been arrested and had a judicial probable cause determination for a serious or violent felony identified in Penal Code § 667.5(c) or Penal Code § 1192.7(c). (b) The individual has been arrested and had a judicial probable cause determination for a felony punishable by time in a state prison.
(c) The individual has been convicted of an offense as identified in Government Code § 7282.5(a).
(d) The individual is a current registrant on the California Sex and Arson Registry. (e) The individual is identified by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s Immigration and Customs Enforcement as the subject of an outstanding federal felony arrest warrant.
413.7.2 NOTICE TO INDIVIDUALS
Individuals in custody shall be given a copy of documentation received from U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) regarding a hold, notification, or transfer request along with information as to whether the San Fernando Police Department intends to comply with the request (Government Code § 7283.1).
If the San Fernando Police Department provides ICE with notification that an individual is being, or will be, released on a certain date, the same notification shall be provided in writing to the individual and to his/her attorney or to one additional person who the individual may designate (Government Code § 7283.1).
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 510 of 651
San Fernando Police Department
San Fernando PD Policy Manual
Immigration Violations
Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2025/01/02, All Rights Reserved.
Published with permission by San Fernando Police
Department
Immigration Violations - 4
413.7.3 ICE INTERVIEWS
Before any interview regarding civil immigration violations takes place between ICE personnel and an individual in custody, the San Fernando Police Department shall provide the individual with a written consent form that explains the purpose of the interview, that the interview is voluntary, and that he/she may decline to be interviewed or may choose to be interviewed only with his/her attorney present. The consent form must be available in the languages specified in Government Code § 7283.1.
413.7.4 TRANSFERS TO IMMIGRATION AUTHORITIES
Employees shall not transfer an individual to immigration authorities unless one of the following circumstances exist (Government Code § 7282.5; Government Code § 7284.6):
(a) Transfer is authorized by a judicial warrant or judicial probable cause determination. (b) The individual has been convicted of an offense as identified in Government Code § 7282.5(a).
(c) The individual is a current registrant on the California Sex and Arson Registry. (d) The individual is identified by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s Immigration and Customs Enforcement as the subject of an outstanding federal felony arrest warrant.
413.7.5 REPORTING TO CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
The Detective Division supervisor shall ensure that data regarding the number of transfers of an individual to immigration authorities, as permitted by Government Code § 7284.6(a)(4), and the offense that allowed for the transfer is collected and provided to the Records Supervisor for required reporting to the DOJ (Government Code § 7284.6(c)(2)) (see the Records Division Policy).
413.8 U VISA AND T VISA NONIMMIGRANT STATUS
Under certain circumstances, federal law allows temporary immigration benefits, known as a U visa, to victims and witnesses of certain qualifying crimes (8 USC § 1101(a)(15)(U)).
Similar immigration protection, known as a T visa, is available for certain qualifying victims of human trafficking (8 USC § 1101(a)(15)(T)).
Any request for assistance in applying for U visa or T visa status should be forwarded in a timely manner to the supervisor assigned to oversee the handling of any related case. The supervisor should:
(a) Consult with the assigned investigator to determine the current status of any related case and whether further documentation is warranted.
(b) Contact the appropriate prosecutor assigned to the case, if applicable, to ensure the certification or declaration has not already been completed and whether a certification or declaration is warranted.
(c) Address the request and complete the certification or declaration, if appropriate, in a timely manner.
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 511 of 651
San Fernando Police Department
San Fernando PD Policy Manual
Immigration Violations
Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2025/01/02, All Rights Reserved.
Published with permission by San Fernando Police
Department
Immigration Violations - 5
1. The instructions for completing certification and declaration forms can be found on the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) website.
2. Form I-918 Supplement B certification shall be completed if the victim qualifies under Penal Code § 679.10 (multiple serious offenses). The certification shall be completed and not refused for the specified reasons in Penal Code § 679.10(k) (3).
3. Form I-914 Supplement B declaration shall be completed if the victim qualifies under Penal Code § 236.5 or Penal Code § 679.11 (human trafficking). The declaration shall be completed and not refused for completion for the specified reasons in Penal Code § 679.11(j)(3).
4. Forward the completed Form I-918 Supplement B certification or completed Form I-914 declaration B to the victim, family member, or authorized representative (as defined in Penal Code § 679.10 and Penal Code § 679.11) without requiring the victim to provide government-issued identification (Penal Code § 679.10; Penal Code § 679.11)
(d) Ensure that any decision to complete, or not complete, a certification or declaration form is documented in the case file and forwarded to the appropriate prosecutor.
Include a copy of any completed form in the case file.
1. If Form I-918 Supplement B is not certified, a written explanation of denial shall be provided to the victim or authorized representative. The written denial shall include specific details of any reasonable requests for cooperation and a detailed description of how the victim refused to cooperate (Penal Code § 679.10). (e) Inform the victim liaison of any requests and their status. 413.8.1 TIME FRAMES FOR COMPLETION
Officers and their supervisors who are assigned to investigate a case of human trafficking as defined by Penal Code § 236.1 shall complete the above process and the documents needed for indicating the individual is a victim for the T visa application within 15 business days of the first encounter with the victim, regardless of whether it is requested by the victim (Penal Code § 236.5).
Officers and their supervisors shall complete the above process and the documents needed certifying victim cooperation for a U visa or T visa application pursuant to Penal Code § 679.10 and Penal Code § 679.11 within 30 days of a request from the victim, victim's family, or authorized representative related to one of their assigned cases. If the victim is in removal proceedings, the certification shall be processed within seven days of the first business day following the day the request was received.
413.8.2 REPORTING TO LEGISLATURE
The Chief or the authorized designee should ensure that certification requests are reported to the Legislature in January of each year and include the number of certifications signed and the number denied. The report shall comply with Government Code § 9795 (Penal Code § 679.10; Penal Code § 679.11).
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 512 of 651
San Fernando Police Department
San Fernando PD Policy Manual
Immigration Violations
Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2025/01/02, All Rights Reserved.
Published with permission by San Fernando Police
Department
Immigration Violations - 6
413.8.3 POLICE REPORTS
Upon request, an officer or supervisor should provide a victim or authorized representative with a copy of the report filed by the victim within seven days of the request (Penal Code § 679.10). 413.9 TRAINING
The Training supervisor should ensure that all appropriate employees receive training on immigration issues.
Training should include:
(a) Identifying civil versus criminal immigration violations. (b) Factors that may be considered in determining whether a criminal immigration violation has been committed.
(c) Prohibitions contained in the California Values Act (Government Code § 7284 et seq.).
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 513 of 651
ATTACHMENT "B"
ORDINANCE NO. _ 1_
88_
4 _
4_1 __ _
An ordinance adding Chapter 19 to Division 19 of the Los Angeles Administrative Code to prohibit City resources, including property and personnel, from being utilized for immigration enforcement or for cooperation with federal immigration agents.
THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF LOS ANGELES
DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Chapter 19 is added to Division 19 of the Los Angeles Administrative Code to read as follows:
CHAPTER 19
PROHIBITION OF THE USE OF CITY RESOURCES FOR
FEDERAL IMMIGRATION ENFORCEMENT
Sec. 19.190. Definitions.
For purposes of this chapter, the following words and phrases are defined as follows:
"Citizenship or Immigration Status" shall mean all information or classification regarding citizenship of the United States or any other country, place of birth, the authority to reside in or otherwise be present in the United States, including visa status, and the time or manner of a person's entry into the United States.
"Immigration Agent" means an individual engaged in Immigration Enforcement against natural persons, including agents employed by U.S.
Immigration and Customs Enforcement or U.S. Customs and Border Protection, and all other individuals authorized to conduct Immigration Enforcement against natural persons under 8 U.S.C. §1357(g) or any other federal law. "Immigration Enforcement" means any and all efforts to investigate, enforce, or assist in the investigation or enforcement of any federal civil immigration law against natural persons, and also includes any and all efforts to investigate, enforce, or assist in the investigation or enforcement of any federal criminal immigration law that penalizes a natural person's presence in, entry, or reentry to, or employment in, the United States.
Sec. 19.191. Prohibition on the Use of City Resources.
Unless required by federal or state law, no City resources, including, but not limited to, City personnel and City property, shall be utilized to:
1 April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 514 of 651 (a) Inquire into or collect information about an individual's Citizenship or Immigration Status, unless such information is necessary to provide a City service, including the provision of immigration and naturalization assistance, for election-related purposes or appointment to a City office or commission, or as required for purposes of City employment or the disbursement of City funds. (b) Investigate, cite, arrest, hold, transfer, or detain any person for the purpose of Immigration Enforcement, except as authorized under California Government Code Section 7284.6(b )(1 ). Prior to conducting any probable cause arrest for a violation of 8 U.S.C. Section 1326(a) that may be subject to the enhancement specified in 8 U.S.C. Section 1326(b)(2), or prior to transferring a suspect to an Immigration Agent based on a probable cause arrest for a violation of 8 U.S.C. Section 1326(a) that may be subject to the enhancement specified in 8 U.S.C. Section 1326(b)(2), City personnel shall obtain approval from their respective department's designated immigrant affairs liaison. (c) Respond to any administrative warrant or other request to detain, transfer, or notify any Immigration Agent about the status or release of any individual for the purpose of Immigration Enforcement.
(d) Provide any Immigration Agent access to any non-public areas of property owned or controlled by the City, including City jails, for the purpose of Immigration Enforcement.
(e) Make any person in City custody available to any Immigration Agent for an interview for the purpose of Immigration Enforcement. (f) Participate in Immigration Enforcement in any operation, joint operation, or joint task force involving any Immigration Agent.
Sec. 19.192. Confidentiality and Protection of City Data.
Except as required by 8 U.S.C. § 1373 or other applicable federal or state law, no City personnel shall provide access to any City data or information that can be used to determine or trace a person's Citizenship or Immigration Status to any Immigration Agent. In furtherance of this restriction, as of the effective date of this ordinance, City personnel shall not provide City data or information that can be used to determine or trace a person's Citizenship or Immigration Status to any City contractor unless the contractor first agrees in writing to prohibit the contractor's employees and subcontractors from providing that data or information to any Immigration Agent, to the extent permitted by law. All City employees shall treat information that can be used to distinguish or trace a person's Citizenship or Immigration Status, either on its own or when combined with other information, as confidential information, to the extent permitted by law, and shall handle, maintain, and secure such information according to the standards for confidential information set forth in City policy. 2 April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 515 of 651 Sec. 19.193. Judicial Warrants.
Nothing in this chapter shall prohibit or otherwise restrict the City from complying with a valid warrant for a criminal offense issued by a federal or state judge, or other order evidencing a judicial determination of probable cause.
Sec. 19.194. Adoption of Policy.
To the extent that some City departments are, by terms of the charter, exempt from the prohibitions in this chapter, they are strongly encouraged to adopt policies consonant with the provisions contained herein.
Sec. 19.195. Severability.
If any subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase of this chapter is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this chapter. The City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted this chapter, and each and every subsection, sentence, clause, and phrase thereof not declared invalid or unconstitutional, without regard to whether any portion of the chapter would be subsequently declared invalid or unconstitutional.
Sec. 2. URGENCY CLAUSE. News organizations are reporting that the incoming federal administration, on January 20, 2025, intends to begin an immediate roll back of longstanding policies that currently focus the federal government's limited immigration enforcement resources on deportations of people deemed threats to public safety or national security. The same news reports indicate that the incoming administration will quickly reverse numerous humanitarian parole programs, which grant City residents lawful status and work authorization. These policy changes, and others, including the possible use of military assets, are being proposed, in part, to allow for a program of mass deportation, which will directly affect the public peace, health, and safety of all residents across the City. Therefore, the City Council finds and declares that this ordinance is required for the immediate protection of the public peace, health and safety. The policies set forth in this ordinance are rooted in a commitment to the principle that all of Los Angeles is safer when our City personnel maintain a relationship of trust, respect, and cooperation with City residents. The cooperation of immigrant communities to report crimes and assist in the investigation and prosecution of criminals is critical to the fair and effective enforcement of the law and the safety of all members of the community. When residents feel confident that they can come forward as a victim of or a witness to a crime, irrespective of immigration status, the City's ability to protect and serve all residents is enhanced. In the 45 years since adopting its initial immigration-related policies, Los Angeles has benefited greatly from the cooperation of witnesses and victims of crime in the City's immigrant communities. These positive outcomes will not continue if immigrant communities see City personnel as agents of federal immigration authorities because such fear reduces cooperation with the City and erodes the relationship between the City and its communities. While the City's policies 3 April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 516 of 651 limit the City's cooperation with federal immigration enforcement, neither existing LAPD policies nor the current executive directives are codified into local municipal law. In addition, existing policies allow immigration agents access to City property to interview people in City custody and lack comprehensive restrictions on limiting direct and indirect data sharing with immigration agents. This allows for significant exposure of City residents and their data to immigration agencies, undermining the City's commitment to protecting all residents from City resources being utilized for immigration enforcement.
The City Council adopts this ordinance to become effective upon publication pursuant to Los Angeles City Charter Section 253.
4 April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 517 of 651 Sec. 3. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage of this ordinance and have it published in accordance with Council policy, either in a daily newspaper circulated in the City of Los Angeles or by posting for ten days in three public places in the City of Los Angeles: one copy on the bulletin board located at the Main Street entrance to the Los Angeles City Hall; one copy on the bulletin board located at the Main Street entrance to the Los Angeles City Hall East; and one copy on the bulletin board located at the Temple Street entrance to the Los Angeles County Hall of Records.
Approved as to Form and Legality
Date
Senior Assistant City Attorney
November 26, 2024
-------------
F.I N 23-0243 I e 0. ___________ _
M:\GENERAL COUNSEL DIVISION\ORDINANCES AND REPORTS\ORDINANCES - FINAL YELLOW\Revised - LAAC Chap 19, Div 19 - Prohibition of City Resources for Immigration Enforcement.docx The Clerk of the City of Los Angeles
hereby certifies that the foregoing
ordinance was passed by the Council of
the City of Los Angeles, by a vote of not
less than three-fourths of all its
members.
CITY CLERK
J .. ~
December 4, 2024
Ordinance Passed ------
Ordinance Published: 12/19/2024
Ordinance Effective Date: 12/19/2024
MAYOR
Approved 12/09/2024
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 518 of 651
MOTION
SOLIS ___________________________
RIDLEY-THOMAS ____________________________
KUEHL ___________________________
HAHN ___________________________
BARGER ___________________________
AGN. NO._____
REVISED MOTION BY SUPERVISORS HILDA L. SOLIS AND September 1, 2020
SHEILA KUEHL
Ending ICE Transfers Without a Judicial Warrant in LA County Los Angeles County is home to about 3.6 million immigrants, accounting for 36 percent of the county’s population. The county’s immigrant residents—whether naturalized U.S. citizens, lawful permanent residents, or undocumented—are valued and integral members of our social and economic fabric. Most of the county’s immigrant noncitizen population—nearly 70 percent—has lived in the United States for more than a decade, which has resulted in them building strong roots for themselves, their families, and their communities. For instance, nearly 60 percent of all children born in the county have at least one immigrant parent. Accordingly, immigration has been one of the County of Los Angeles (“County”)’s top priorities. Indeed, in 2017, this Board of Supervisors (“Board”) reaffirmed the County’s bold commitment to immigrant residents and their families by unanimously passing a motion to make immigration a County priority, the highest designation possible, and has followed through with more than 55 motions to further uplift the wellbeing and protect the rights of immigrants and their families who have made the county their home.
ATTACHMENT "C" April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 519 of 651
In response to COVID-19, aggressive steps have been taken nationwide to reduce jail populations and custodial arrests and to implement safety measures inside jails and prisons to prevent the spread of the virus and save lives. On March 31, 2020, this Board adopted a motion to direct the appropriate County departments to identify and implement measures to prevent the spread of the COVID-19 virus in County jails and to safeguard incarcerated individuals and staff, as well as their families and communities. As a result, the population in the County jails has been significantly reduced from more than 17,000 in early March 2020 to 13,033 as of August 18, 2020.
By contrast, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE”) has resisted and refused to significantly change its enforcement and detention practices in the face of the pandemic—imperiling the health and lives of county residents. ICE’s callous disregard for human lives has been decried even by medical doctors from the U.S.
Department of Homeland Security and by federal courts across the country. (See, e.g., Bravo Castillo v. Barr, No. 20-cv-00605-TJH-AFM, 2020 WL 1502864, *11 (C.D. Cal.
Mar. 27, 2020) [“[T]he Government cannot act with a callous disregard for the safety of our fellow human beings.”]; Hernandez Roman v. Wolf, No. 5:20-cv-768-TJH, 2020 WL 1952656, at *14-15 (C.D. Cal. April 23, 2020) [finding that ICE is “deliberately indifferent to the potential exposure of [detainees] to COVID-19” and has “acted with callous disregard for [their] safety”].) Courts have found ICE’s conduct to violate the substantive due process rights of its detainees in all five of its California detention facilities. In Los Angeles, the federal district court noted that the conditions of confinement at the Adelanto ICE detention facility are “inconsistent with contemporary standards of human decency.” (Hernandez Roman v. Wolf, No.
ATTACHMENT 2 April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 520 of 651
EDCV2000768TJHPVCX, 2020 WL 1952656, at *8 (C.D. Cal. Apr. 23, 2020).) Recently, the court agreed to make individual bail determinations for detainees because of ICE’s refusal to address risks related to COVID-19. (See Hernandez Roman v. Wolf, No. EDCV2000768TJHPVCX, 2020 WL 3481564, at *2 (C.D. Cal. June 17, 2020).) COVID-19 is spreading through ICE detention facilities across the country at high rates. As of July 14, 2020, ICE’s records showed that there were 3,183 positive cases among 13,562 people tested in its custody nationwide. ICE did not clarify whether the remaining tests were confirmed negative or still pending, meaning that a minimum of
23.5 percent of people tested positive through July 14, 2020. As of August 2020, five individuals in ICE custody have died of COVID-19, but this figure only tracks deaths in custody and not those who contract the virus in detention but then die after release or deportation. Importantly, new research suggests that ICE is severely underreporting the prevalence of COVID-19 in its detention facilities; the true infection rate among detainees may be 15 times greater than reported by ICE. Indeed, according to a federal court, evidence shows that ICE has “avoided widespread [COVID-19] testing of staff and detainees . . . not for lack of tests, but for fear that positive test results would require them to implement safety measures that they apparently felt were not worth the trouble.” (Zepeda Rivas v. Jennings, No. 20-CV-02731-VC, 2020 WL 4554646, at *1 (N.D. Cal., Aug. 6, 2020).) Although ICE has received about 1,900 COVID-19 test kits for the Adelanto detention facility, it has refused to allow the vast majority of them to be used.
ICE’s shocking disregard for the safety and constitutional rights of those it arrests and detains has been well-established even prior to COVID-19. For example, in ATTACHMENT 2 April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 521 of 651
September 2019, the federal district court in Los Angeles held that the network of databases on which ICE based its detainers were too error-ridden and incomplete to be reliable sources of information for probable cause determinations. (Gonzalez v. ICE, 416 F. Supp. 3d 995 (C.D. Cal. 2019).) The court emphasized that ICE’s sole dependence on unreliable databases caused “many U.S. citizens [to] become exposed to possible false arrest” and to be unconstitutionally detained. (Id. at 1018.) In May 2019, the Sheriff’s Civilian Oversight Commission ("COC") recommended that the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department (“Department”) should not permit ICE or its contractors to access any Departmental property, including jails, and should not honor ICE requests to cooperate in the transfer of any individual to ICE custody, unless required by federal or state law—that is, unless ICE presents a judicial warrant or judicial probable cause determination. The COC report also noted that the Department spent at least $1,378,000 a year in employing custody assistants to carry out duties associated with facilitating ICE arrests. The use of these County resources undermines not only the County’s investment of $1.5 million a year in the Los Angeles Justice Fund (“LAJF”), a program designed to provide immigration lawyers to defend families against immigration detention and deportation, but also the County’s commitment to protect immigrants, their families, and co-workers from immigration enforcement overreach. In fact, LAJF providers have had to defend County residents who only ended up in ICE detention and deportation proceedings after being transferred from the County jails.
Community and labor advocates have long asked that the Department stop its entanglement with immigration agents. This practice has destroyed community trust and undermined public safety. It has wasted County taxpayer resources that are all too ATTACHMENT 2 April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 522 of 651
precious now during this unprecedented public health and economic crisis. It has contributed to thousands of family separations. Notably, these transfers to ICE have led to county residents being detained for prolonged, often indefinite periods in immigration detention while they fight their cases. As a significant number of detained immigrants are workers and often the primary breadwinners in their families, many have lost employment and the ability to provide for their families while detained. In turn, families’ financial devastation has increasingly burdened the County’s social safety net.
In April 2020, the current Los Angeles County Sheriff (“Sheriff”) issued a moratorium on ICE transfers absent a judicial warrant, and the Department extended this moratorium on a monthly basis. On August 3, 2020, the Sheriff made the moratorium permanent under his administration. This policy, however, is not binding on future Sheriffs.
To further the County’s ongoing response to the public health emergency, and in the interest of permanently safeguarding the health, safety, and constitutional rights of all Angelenos, the County should enshrine the current Sheriff’s moratorium on transfers to immigration authorities absent a judicial warrant or judicial probable cause determination into County policy. This action would also extend the County’s Sensitive Locations Policy that this Board adopted in 2017 to prohibit immigration authorities’ access to County facilities, unless they present a judicial warrant.
WE, THEREFORE, MOVE that the Board of Supervisors:
1. Prohibit the use of any County resources, property, personnel, time, labor, or funds to be used to:
ATTACHMENT 2 April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 523 of 651
(a) honor requests by immigration authorities or persons or entities contracted for immigration enforcement purposes to hold, detain, house, transfer, or otherwise facilitate the arrest of any person in Sheriff’s Department custody, unless pursuant to a judicial warrant or judicial probable cause determination, or as otherwise required by federal or state law; or
(b) directly communicate with immigration authorities or persons or entities contracted for immigration enforcement purposes regarding an individual’s release time, date, or place, or immigration status, or to otherwise participate in any immigration enforcement activities, unless pursuant to a judicial warrant or judicial probable cause determination, or as otherwise required by federal or state law.
2. Prohibit access to and use of County property—including Sheriff’s Department jails, stations, courthouse lockups, and databases—to immigration authorities or persons or entities contracted for immigration enforcement purposes, unless pursuant to a judicial warrant or judicial probable cause determination, or as otherwise required by federal or state law.
3. Instruct the Chief Executive Officer, in consultation with the Office of the County Counsel, to prepare and issue a letter to impacted County departments advising them of this directive.
4. The County defines a “judicial probable cause determination” and “judicial warrant” as defined in Government Code section 7284.4, subdivisions (h) and (i).
ATTACHMENT 2 April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 524 of 651
5. The County defines “immigration authorities” as defined in Government Code section 7284.4, subdivision section 7284.4 (c).
6. The County defines “immigration enforcement” as defined in Government Code section 7284.4, subdivision (f).
# # #
HLS:el
ATTACHMENT 2 April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 525 of 651 1 RESOLUTION NO. 25-29,591
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
BURBANK STRENGTHENING AND EXPANDING THE
CITY’S COMMITMENT TO A WELCOMING, SAFE, AND
INCLUSIVE COMMUNITY FOR ALL, REGARDLESS OF
IMMIGRATION STATUS
THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK FINDS THAT:
A. Burbank is a diverse community that values inclusivity, diversity, equity, and safety for all. The City is committed to serving the entire community and upholding the dignity of all persons, regardless of their national origin or immigration status; B. The California Values Act (Senate Bill 54), approved on October 5, 2017, and effective January 1, 2018, restricts state and local law enforcement agency involvement in immigration enforcement activities and prohibits agency use of money or personnel to investigate, interrogate, detain, detect, or arrest persons for immigration enforcement purposes;
C. In 2018, the Burbank Police Department amended Department Policy 428 - Immigration Violations/Truth Act to align Department policy with the requirements of Senate Bill 54;
D. Enforcement of federal civil immigration law falls exclusively within the authority of the federal government. No City department, agency, or commission, including the Burbank Police Department, has any inherent authority or duty to investigate violations of federal civil immigration law or to assist in enforcement of such laws; and E. It is imperative that the City fosters a welcoming and supportive environment for all, strengthens trust between City Officials, staff, and the community, and provides essential core functions, including safeguarding the safety and liberties of all members of the community;
F. Extending the application of Senate Bill 54 to all City staff will reinforce and expand the City’s commitment to ensuring accessible services, allowing community members to utilize city services and programs, report crimes, and participate in community events without concern about City involvement in federal immigration enforcement actions.
THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK RESOLVES:
1. All Burbank Police Department employees, both sworn and non-sworn personnel, shall adhere to Burbank Police Department Policy 428 and the California Values Act - Senate Bill 54 relating to immigration enforcement. The City Manager, or designee, shall provide notice to the City Council if Policy 428 is modified or stricken.
ATTACHMENT "D"
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 526 of 651
25-29,591
2 2. Unless required by court order, or local, state, or federal law, no City employee, from any department, shall:
a. Inquire into or collect data related to an individual’s citizenship or immigration status unless such information is required by law, including election-related purposes, appointments to City offices or commissions, or the disbursement of City funds;
b. Use City or department moneys, personnel, or other resources to assist in the investigation, interrogation, detention, detection, or arrest of persons for immigration enforcement purposes, except as authorized under the California Values Act - Senate Bill 54;
c. Respond to any administrative warrant or other request to detain, transfer, or notify any immigration agent about the status or custody release of any individual for immigration enforcement purposes; and d. Allow access to any non-public areas of property owned or controlled by the City, to any immigration agent or non-City personnel for the purpose of immigration enforcement.
3. Except as required by 8 U.S.C. § 1373 or other applicable local, state or federal law, no City employee shall provide access to, or release, any City data or information related to the citizenship or immigration status of any individual. All City employees shall treat citizenship or immigration status information as confidential to the extent permitted by law, and shall handle, maintain, and secure such information according to the standards for confidential information set forth in City policy.
4. The City Manager, or designee, for purposes of transparency, shall implement policies and procedures requiring all City personnel to adhere to the requirements contained in this resolution. The City Manager, or designee, will administer the policy, monitor compliance, implement reporting procedures, and take measures as appropriate for noncompliance.
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 527 of 651
25-29,591
3 5. The City Manager, or designee, shall implement a public information and education program to inform individuals of their rights within the City of Burbank under local, state, and federal immigration laws and enforcement policies, and seek opportunities to partner with community-based organizations on this education program.
PASSED and ADOPTED this 11th day of February, 2025.
_s/Nikki Perez_______________
Nikki Perez
Mayor
Approved as to Form
Attest: Office of the City Attorney
_s/Kimberley Clark_____________ By: _s/Ray Johal_____________ Kimberley Clark, City Clerk Ray Johal
Senior Assistant City Attorney
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) ss.
CITY OF BURBANK )
I, Kimberley Clark, City Clerk of the City of Burbank, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly passed and adopted by a vote of the Council of the City of Burbank at its regular meeting held on the 11th day of February, 2025, by the following vote:
AYES: Anthony, Mullins, Rizzotti, Takahashi, and Perez.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
_s/Kimberley Clark_____________
Kimberley Clark, City Clerk
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 528 of 651
RESOLUTION NO. __________
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF CITY OF GLENDALE, CALIFORNIA
AFFIRMING THE STATEMENT OF THE CHIEF OF POLICE REGARDING THE DETENTION
OF INDIVIDUALS BASED ON IMMIGRATION STATUS
WHEREAS, the City Council is greatly concerned about public safety in the City of Glendale; and
WHEREAS, Chief of Police Robert Castro recently issued the following statement regarding immigration and public safety:
“The Glendale Police Department does not have the authority nor the responsibility to incarcerate or detain individuals solely based on immigration status. Our fundamental duties are based on public safety — serving the community, while focusing efforts primarily on crime prevention and law enforcement. Our responsibility is to protect the lives of the community we are sworn to serve and honor the principles of democracy upon which this country was founded”; and
WHEREAS, the City Council desires to affirm the Chief of Police’s statement and support the values expressed therein; and
WHEREAS, the Council desires to ensure the efficient use of limited resources to fight crime and address public safety issues impacting the City of Glendale.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. All of the foregoing recitals set forth herein above are true and incorporated herein.
SECTION 2. The City Council affirms the statement of Chief of Police Robert Castro regarding the detention of individuals based on immigration status.
SECTION 3. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage of this Resolution.
Adopted this __________ day of _______________, 2017.
By: __________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
J:\FILES\DOcFILES\RES0\Reso Affirming chiefs Statement re Immigration Status.doc 1 Page lof2
ATTACHMENT "E"
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 529 of 651
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
I, ARDASHES KASSAKHIAN, Clerk of the City of Glendale, certify that the foregoing Resolution No. ____________ was adopted by the Council of the City of Glendale at a regular meeting held on the ______________ day of _____________, 2017, and that same was adopted by the following vote:
Ayes:
Noes:
Absent:
Abstain:
City Clerk
°b~1 FORM
.. erino
General Count -Pollee
J:~FILES~DOCFILES~RESO~Reso Affirming chiefs Statement re Immigration Status.doc
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 530 of 651
ATTACHMENT "F"
RESOLUTION NO. 9557
-----
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASADENA, CALIFORNIA
ENHANCING SAFETY, REFUGE AND EQUAL OPPORTUNITY FOR ALL
WHEREAS, immigrants histo.rically have been a part of Pasadena's rich history.
Pasadena is one of the most diverse cities in the San Gabriel Valley, and we have welcomed everyone who seeks to realize their dreams and build their families here, regardless of national origin or immigration status. In this environment, Pasadena has consistently been a champion of inclusiveness and tolerance. Today, more than 31 % of our residents are foreign-born. As in.other Southern California cities, immigrants are a large part of the engine of our economy. More than that, immigrants have woven the social, cultural and civic fabric of Pasadena from our educational institutions to our artistic stages, from the halls of government to community activism, from our culinary scene to our fields of play.
As a community, we have a long-standing commitment to immigrants in Pasadena. More recently, our City Council adopted City Council Resolution No. 9319 in 2013, which calls for humane and comprehensive immigration reform and specifies that local governments like Pasadena should not be required to enforce federal immigration law: Most recently, in November and December 2016, our City Council discussed concerns as to how the incoming federal administration's policies might affect Pasadena, and our City Council reiterated our commitment as expressed in City Council Resolution No. 9319. At that ti'me, we reaffirmed that our City would not be involved in any federal immigration enforcement activities.
WHEREAS, recent events in our region and across our nation have prompted our community and this City Council to make clear our established vision that all Pasadena residents, regardless of immigration status, are connected to community resources, have access to critical government services, are engaged in civic life, and are informed about critical immigration law and policy. This City Council's most solemn responsibility is to keep all of our City's people safe, and to strongly support our Police Department's existing policies with respect to federal immigration laws. Thrs support is rooted in the principle that all of Pasadena is safer when our Police Department maintains a relationship of trust, respect and cooperation with all City residents. When people feel confident that they can come forvl/ard as a victim of, or witness to a crime, irrespective of immigration status, our Police Department's ability to protect and serve all is enhanced.
WHEREAS, all residents of Pasadena must feel safe and supported when accessing the vast array of City facilities, programs, and services available to them. City employees shall maintain and protect sensitive information regarding the immigration status of our residents. Our Police Department shall not directly assist in investigating, detaining or arresting individuals for violations of federal immigration law. Our local resources should be focused on local issues.
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 531 of 651
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Pasadena as follows:
Section 1. The City Council of the City of Pasadena, California, hereby finds, determines, and declares as follows:
The City of Pasadena will not enforce federal immigration laws and the City Manager will ensure that all City policies are consistent with this declaration.
Section 2. The City Council of the City of Pasadena, California, hereby finds, determines, and declares as follows:
The City Manager will ensure that the Pasadena Police Department maintains an immigration policy that is consistent with proposed Policy 428 and the provisions of this Resolution. Among other provisions, said policy reiterates that the Department does not investigate and prosecute violations of federal immigration laws.
Section 3. The City Council of the City of Pasadena, California, hereby finds, determines, and declares as follows:
The City Manager will ensure that the City's Manual of Personnel & Administrative Rules, Section 2, Qty-Wide Policies a~d Standards of Conduct, is consistent with this Resolution. As indicated, no City employee will use City funds or resources to assist in the enforcement of federal immigration law or to gather or disseminate information regarding the immigration status of individuals in the City, unless required by law.
Section 4. The City Council of the City of Pasadena, California, hereby finds, determines, and declares as follows:
All City Commissions shall conduct their business in compliance with the direction provided in this Resolution.
Section 5. The City Council of the City of Pasadena, California, hereby finds, determines, and declares as follows:
. The City Manager will periodically report out the number of contacts with respect to immigration enforcement that the Pasadena Police Department has had with the United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement to the City Council Public Safety Committee. 2 April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 532 of 651 Adopted at the regular meeting of the Pasadena City Council on the 27th day of March, 2017, by the following vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Gordo, Hampton, Kennedy, Hadison,
HcAustin, ~ilson, Vice Mayor Masuda, Mayor Tornek
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Michele Beal Bagneris
City Attorney
3 April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 533 of 651 Agena eport
TO:
March 27, 2017
Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: City Manager
SUBJECT: Consideration of City policy in regard to Immigration issues RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the City Council:
1. Find that. the action proposed herein is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines, Section 15061 (b)(3), as it will not have a potentially significant environmental effect and, therefore, falls under the ugeneral rule" exemption;
2. Approve the City's Legislative Platform, Item 8 on the City Council Agenda, including the support for the reforming of federal immigration law, as detailed in the Platform and in the Background section of this report;
3. Consider what, if any, additional actions the Council may wish to take beyond those being implemented at the staff level, as described in this report and its attachments, in regard to federal immigration issues.
BACKGROUND:
The City of Pas~dena is a thriving, diverse and welcoming community. The City strongly believes that immigrants strengthe the community economically and culturally, and welcomes their contributions to society. Recent actions at a national level on immigration matte~s and, specifically, calls for deportation of the undocumented, have sparked a debate over what position state and local governments should take on deportation and broader immigration issues. This report provides both the background on the City of Pasadena's·attention to these issues to date, and context for any broader, or narrower, position which the City Council might wish to take as a matter of public policy.
MEETING OF 03/27/201 7 AGENDA ITEM N0. __ 1_2 _ _
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 534 of 651
Consideration of City policy in regard to Immigration issues March 27, 2017
THE CITY OF PASADENA LEGISLATIVE PLATFORM ON IMMIGRATION:
On October 28, 2013 the City Council adopted Resolution 9319 (Attachment "A"), which set forth the Council's position that Pasadena supp~rts a humane and comprehensive immigration reform proposal with the following principles: provides an attainable and affordable pathway to full citizenship for the nearly 11 million undocumented immigrants in the United States; establishes family unity as a cornerstone of our immigration system; provides due process and labor protections; allows access to key essential services such as health care; and states that local governments should not be mandated to enforce federal immigration laws, particularly when resources necessary to enforce local laws are already stretched.
This position has been incorporated into the City's adopted Federal Legislative Platform each year since. Further, as part of this evening's Council agenda, the Legislative Policy Committee is recommending that the City Council amend this policy statement to include the additional support for federal legislation that would protect children who were brought to this country without immigration documents, as part of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program. In addition, the Legislative Policy Committee is recommending opposing efforts to deny federal funding to Sanctuary Cities.
PASADENA POLICE POLICY ON IMMIGRATION:
In addition to the Council's policy statements, the Pasadena Police Department has long refrained from inquiring as to the immigration status of those persons with whom it has contact. The Pasadena Police administrative policy has embodied this practice since 1989. This practice reflects the relationship of trust between the Pasadena. Police Department and the community it serves, as well as the reality that the safety of the entire community is put at risk if people are fearful of cooperating with local law enforcement for fear of deportation.
In light of the recent public attention to these issues, the Pasadena Police Department has been working to update its administrative policy, which has been informed by suggestions made by community members, including a Resolution suggested by community members entitled "Pasadena Police Department Immigration Status and Bias-Free Policing Policy," (Attachment "B"). This resulted in a draft, policy, "Policy 428 Immigration Policy," (Attachment "C"). Notice was given to the Pasad~na Police Offi~er's Association of the intent to adopt this draft Policy, and the Association had no objections. The intent of this draft Policy is to continue disengagement of the Pasadena April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 535 of 651
Consideration of City policy in regard to Immigration issues March 27, 2017
Police Department.from deportation activity to the greatest extent permitted by law and adopts some of the language from the suggested Resolution. It differs from the suggested Resolution in a couple of areas: First, it is staff's positi~n that the Police Department should not completely disengage from the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), or any law enforcement agency. For example, ICE is involved in matters of national security, including combating terrorism, human trafficking, drug trafficking, and money laundering, and the Police Department should continue working cooperatively with ICE,in this type of law enforcement activity. Second, federal law does not allow any government entity to prohibit contact by individuals with ICE.
CITY OF PASADENA STANDARD OF CONDUCT REGARDING CONFIDENTIALITY:
The Trump administration's recent pronouncements regarding potential accelerated and expanded deportations of undocumented immigrants has stirred fear and concern in numerous communities, including Pasadena. On February 2th the Council heard consider~ble public testimony regarding the issue. Related to this, a number of community members have asked the City ·council to adopt a Resolution (Attachment "D"), which would declare Pasadena to be a "Sanctuary City" and direct all "City departments, agencies, or commissions to review their confidentiality policies and identify any changes necessary to ensure that information collected from individuals is limited to that necessary to perform their duties and is not used or disclosed for any other purpose." It was further suggested that, "[i]t shall be the policy of all City departments, agencies, and commissions not to provide non-publicly available information about any individual to any entity or official, including but not limited to any state or federal governm~nt agency or official, unless necessary to perform department, agency, or commission duties or required by law." The intent of the Resolution provided by community members is to prevent_ the· City from participating in any registry system that might facilitate deportations.
To address the comn:,unity concerns regarding the need to prevent the reuse of personal information in a deportation or oth~r adverse setting, a new citywide policy has been developed for incorporation into the City's Manual of Personnel Rules, Practices and Procedures, "Standards of Conduct Regarding Confidentiality" (Attachment "E").
This Policy would apply to all City employees. Notice has been given to all of the City's bargaining groups of the intent to finalize the Policy, and no questions were raised by any bargaining group. This Policy sets forth the City's commitment to the confidentiality of information gathered for municipal purposes and would explicitly limit collection or dissemination of information regarding a person's status. This policy, as developed by City staff, differs from that proposed by community advocates most significantly in that it does not declare the City of Pasadena to be a "Sanctuary City." April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 536 of 651
Consideration of City policy in regard to Immigration issues March 27, 2017
SANCTUARY DESIGNATION:
Currently, there is no legal definition or uniform approach as to what constitutes a "Sanctuary City." Neither those communities which embrace the definitio~. nor the elements of the federal government which might penalize a city for that designation h!3ve set forth a list of elements necessary to constitute a Sanctuary City. Historically, a "sanctuary" was a sacred place or place of worship. The notion of a sanctuary being a place in which the persecuted could seek refuge from civil authorities is found in the Biblical Book of Deuteronomy, in_ the laws of ancient Greece and Rome, and in medieval Church canon law. In the 1980's, the Sanctuary Movement was a religious and political movement to provide safe haven for Central American refugees fleeing civil wars. It responded to federal immigration policies that made obtaining asylum difficult for Central Americans. More recently, the term, Sanctuary City,. has come to be a selfdesignation in conjunction with policies that limit or prevent collaboration with the federal government on immigration enforcement.
The purpose of the City's administrative policies is to set forth rules for the conduct of City business by City employees, consequently the self-designation as a "Sanctuary City" would not, in and of itself, affect administrative policy. Moreover, use of the term suggests a level of protection against Federal enforcement offered by the City that, in reality, does not exist. To the extent the City Council may wish to make a more definitive, public policy statement, staff would recommend that it be incorporated into the Legislative Policy Platform.
It should be noted that these public policy issues are being addre.ssed at the state-level as well. Specifically Senate Bill 54 (SB54), is currently making its way through the legislature (Attachment "F"). This Bill, if passed and then approved by the Governor, would declare California to be a "Sanctuary State" and prohibit California law enforcement agencies from:
(1) Using agency or department moneys, facilities, property, equipment, or personnel to investigate, interrogate, detain, detect, or arrest persons for immigration enforcement purposes, including, but not limited to, any of the following:
(A) Inquiring into or collecting information about an individual's immigration status, except as required to comply with Section 922(d)(5) of Title 18 of the United States Code.
(B) Detaining an individual on the basis of a hold request. '
(C) Responding to requests for notification or transfer requests. (D) Providing or responding to requests for non-publicly available personal information about an individual, including, but not limited to, information about the April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 537 of 651
Consideration of City policy in regard to Immigration issues March 27, 2017
person's release date, home address, or work address for immigration enforcement purposes.
(E) Making arrests based on civil immigration warrants. (F) Giving federal immigration authorities access to interview individuals in agency or department custody for immigration enforcement purposes. (G) Assisting federal immigration authorities in the activities described in Section 1357(a)(3) of Title 8 of the United States Code.
(H) Performing the functions of an immigration officer, whether pursuant to Section 1357(9) of Title 8 of the United States Code or any other law, regulation, or policy, whether formal or informal.
(2) Making agency or department databases, including databases maintained for the agency or department by private vendors, or the information therein other than information regarding an individual's citizenship or immigration status, available to anyone or any entity for the purpose of immigration enforcement.
Any agreements in existence on the ate that this chapter becomes operative that conflict with the terms of this paragraph are terminated on that date. A person or entity provided access to agency or department databases shall certify in writing that the database will not be used for the purposes prohibited by this section.
(3) Placing peace officers under the supervision of federal agencies or employing peace officers deputized as special federal officers or special federal deputies, except to the extent those peace officers remain subject to California law governing conduct of peace officers and the policies of the employing agency. (4) Using federal immigration authorities as interpreters for law enforcement matters relating to individuals in agency or department custody.
The passage of S854 would likely set up a court battle between the state of California and the Trump Administration, which, on January 25th• issued an Executive Order which seeks to withhold federal funds from jurisdictions that fail to comply with Federal law concerning immigration enforcement. To date, the Crty of San Francisco and the County of Santa Clara, along with the cities of Lawrence and Chelsea, MA, have filed suit against the Trump administration seeking to block any cut off of federal funds.
Annually, the City of Pasadena receives a significant amount of federal funding. The amount of federal funding that could actually be subject to elimination in the event of adverse action by the Trump Administration is currently undetermined. Nevertheless, in Fiscal Year 2016 the grand total amount of ederal funding received by the Crty of Pasadena was just under $35 million, broken down as follows:
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 538 of 651
Consideration of City policy in regard to Immigration issues March 27, 2017
Proqram Type Amount of Federal Funds
Housing Programs (mostly Section 8) $17.8 million
Transportation related capital programs $6.8 million
Public Health Proqrams $3.5 million
Foothill Workforce Development Board $3 million
Nutrition Programs $1 .7 million
Non-capital Transportation programs $1 million
Public Safety (Police & Fire) $768,000
Public Art $91 ,000
TOTAL $34.65 Million
It is worth noting that the President's proposed budget, if enacted, would significantly reduce this level of funding.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Various studies indicate that immigrants contribute hundreds of billions of dollars to the American economy. A 2014 conducted by USC estimated that undocumented immigrants contribute $130 billion annually to California's economy and constitute 10% of the workforce. As outlined above, the City routinely received tens of millions of dollars annually from the Federal government to operate programs serving the communities most needy and benefiting the overall well-being of the City.
HEZ
Chief of Police
Director of Human Resources
Respectfully submitted,
STEVE MERMELL
City Manager
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 539 of 651
Consideration of City policy in regard to Immigration issues March 27, 2017
ATTACHMENTS
A. City Council Resolution No. 9319 (A Resolution of the City c.ouncil of the City of Pasadena Supporting a Humane and Comprehensive Immigration Reform Proposal.
B. (Proposed by the Advocates) Pasadena Police Department Immigration Status and Bias-Free Policing Policy.
C. Pasadena Police Department Policy 428 - Immigration Policy (proposed) D. (Proposed by the Advocates) A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Pasadena, California to Welcome, Protect and Defend All Residents By Making Pasadena a Sanctuary City.
E. City of Pasadena Manual of Personnel & Administrative Rules, Section 2, CityWide Policies and Standards of Conduct, AA. Standard of Conduct Regarding Confidentiality.
F. Senate Bill 54 (Sanctuary State)
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 540 of 651
\
ATTACHMENT A
• r
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 541 of 651
ADOPTED RESOLUTION
RESOLUTION NO. 9319
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
PASADENA SUPPORTIN.G A HUMANE AND COMPREHENSIVE
IMM.IGRATION REFORM PROPOSAL
WHEREAS, the United States of America is a nation of values, founded on the principles that all men and women are created equal, and the promise of freedom for all; ANO WHEREAS, the current immigration system is broken, antiquated and not meeting the challenges of the 21st century; It separates families, creates long backlogs for families who are· seeking reunification. Further,· it neglects the hard work and the financial contributions immigrants make to our country; AND
WHEREAS, since 2008 more than 1.6 million immigrants have been deported, and one in . every ten American children faces the threat of deportation of a parent; AND WHEREAS, ·it is estimated that about 11 million undocumented immigrants are in the United • States, and California has the largest population of immigrants, both legal and undocumented; AND
WHEREAS, the President of the United States implemented the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) and the Migration Policy Institute estimates that 460,000 Californians qualify for DACA and the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services has reported. that 152,855 Californians have applied for citizenship as of June 30, 2013. This is a step in the right direction, but it is not enough; AND r.
WHEREAS, one in 10 workers in California is an undocumented immigrant, and· immigrants are a vibrant, productive, and vital part of the state's growing economy, holding jobs in areas such as food preparation, machine operations, construction, domestic and household services and general sates; AND
WHEREAS, the·White House reports that a comprehensive immigration reform policy with a pathway to citizenship would, over 10 years, boost U.S. GDP by $1 .4 trillion, increase . total income for all Americans by $791 billion, generate $184 billion in additional state and federal tax revenue from currently undocumented immigrants, and add about 2 million jobs to the U.S. economy; AND •
WHEREAS, Los Angeles County· is home to nearly 1 million undocumented immigrants and 20 percent of children in Los Angeles County have at least one undocumented parent; AND WHEREAS, the San Gabriel Valley and the City of Pasadena are home to an ever growing, diverse population of immigrant families who work and contribute to the City and the region; AND • •
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 542 of 651
WHEREAS, according to the 2010 Census, the City of Pasadena was made up of 31 % of foreign born persons;.AND •
WHEREAS, the City of Pasadena has adopted as part of the 2013 Federal Legislative Platform that we strongly believe that immigrants strengthen the community economically and. culturally, and welcomes their contributions to society. With regard to federal legislation aimed at reforming federal immigration laws, the City urges Congress and the President to reaffirm that addressing unlawful immigration in a compassionate manner is the primary responsibility of the federal government, and that sufficient resources must be committed on the federal level for this purpose. ,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that by adoption of this re~olution, the City of Pasadena hereby supports a humane and comprehensive immigration reform proposal with· the following principles: providing for an attainable and affordable pathway to full citizenship for the nearly 11 million undocumented immigrants in the United States; supporting family unity as a cornerstone of our immigration system; pr9viding due process and labor protections; allowing access to key essential services such as health care; and removing mandates on local governments to enforce federal immigration laws, particularly when resources necessary to enforce local laws are already stretched.
Adopted by the following vote at the meeting of the City Council on the 28th day of October, 2013:
AYES:
Councilmembers Gordo, Kennedy, Madison, McAustin,
Tornek, Vice Mayor Robinson, Mayor Bogaard •
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: Councilmember Masuda
· ABSENT: None
Approved as to Form:
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 543 of 651
Agenda Report
October 28, 2013
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
THROUGH: Legislative Policy Committee (September 25, 2013) FROM: City Manager
SUBJECT: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL SUPPORTING A HUMANE
AND COMPREHENSIVE IMMIGRATION REFORM PROPOSAL
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the City Council adopt a resolution of the City Council of the City of Pasadena supporting a humane and comprehensive immigration reform proposal RECOMMENDATION BY THE LEGISLATIVE POLICY COMMITTEE:
On September 25, 2013 the Legislative Policy Committee had a discussion on a resolution supporting a humane and comprehensive immigration reform proposal. The Committee supported forwarding this resolution to the City Council for their consideration with the intent that the resolution include language from the 2013 Federal Legislative Platform. •
BACKGROUND:
The U.S. Senate approved comprehensive immigration reform legislation (S 744) in June that would provide a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants, a streamlined legal immigration process, tougher interior enforcement, and increased border security. While the measure was approved in bipartisan fashion (69-31), it took approval of a floor amendment to the bill that added $30 billion in border security initiatives to secure significant Republican support. The Senate bill does not include provisions that would mandate that local _law enforcement agencies federal immigration law.
Shortly after Senate approval of its immigration bill, House Republican leadership announced its intention of considering immigration reform in a piecemeal approach MEETING OF 10/28/2013 AGENDA ITEM NO. 17
!
i
• i
I
I
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 544 of 651
Resolution on Immigration Reform
October 28, 2013
rather than ·in one comprehensive measure. A handful of bills dealing with matters su_ch as creating a guest worker program, legalizing children brought into the U.S. at a young age and who are now in school ("DREAMers'), increasing enforcement, and bolstering employment verification systems have been approved on the committee level.
However, none of them has been scheduled for floor action.
While there are House Republicans interested in immigration reform, there appears to be a significant faction in the GOP ranks who strongly oppose any path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants and who are also likely to balk at the Senate proposal to spend an additional $30 billion on border security. House Republican leaders have promised to not bring any immigration bill to the House floor that does not have the support of the majority of the Republican caucus, and since they will probably be consumed by budget matters from now until the end of this year, chances that the House will take up immigration legislation during that time is slim.
Attached to this agenda are two examples of support for immigration reform from organization that advocate the needs of cities: The National League of Cities and the League of California Cities. Attachment A from the National League of Cities is a Legislative Issue Brief titled "Fix The Nation's Broken Immigration System" in which they call for the federal government to adopt a strong and consistent national immigration policy that balances national security needs with renewed effort to grow the nation's workforce, stimulate economy recovery, and remain competitive in the 21st century global market. Attachment B is a letter from the League of California Cities to Senator Feinstein asking for prompt action on this legislation in concert with the principles that include: do not to mandate local enforcement of federal immigration laws and assistance to_ local governments affected by new immigrants.
At the September 2013 regular meeting of the Legislative Policy Committee, Vice Mayor Robinson introduced Rita Medina, a representative from the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles (CJ-:IIRLA). Ms. Medina made a presentation on immigration reform and working towards a fair and humane path to citizenship that is included as Attachment C. As rioted in the presentation, the Los Angeles County is home to nearly one million undocumented immigrants. An estimated 11 % of the Los Angeles County workforce is undocumented and 20% of the children in Los Angeles county have at least on undocumented parent. According to our 2010 census date, Pasadena is made up of 31 % of foreign born persons.
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 545 of 651
Resolution on Immigration Reform
October 28, 2013
FISCAL IMPACT:
Support of this resolution will not have any fiscal impact to the City.
MICHA L J. BECK
City Manager
Respectfully submitted,
·wt
LIE A. GUTIERREZ
sistant City Manager
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 546 of 651
NATIONAL
LEAGUE
of CITIES ilii) Legislative Issue Brief
Fix the Nation's Broken Immigration System
.ATTACHMENT A
NLC calls on the _federal government to adopt a strong and consistent national immigration policy that balances national security needs with renewed efforts to grow the nation's workforce, stimulate economy recovery, and remain competitive in the 21st century global marketplace.
America's immigration system is failing our cities and our economic future. Local governments are caught in the middle of the national debate with no control over the regulation of immigration but with the responsibility for integrating immigrants into our communities and providing the services necessary for stable neighborhoods. Municipal leaders join with civic and business leaders to highlight the economic necessity of comprehensive immigration reform.
It is time for Congress to acknowledge the economic vitality that immigration brings to this nation and adopt a reform policy that supports secure borders and a path to citizenship for the millions of immigrants currently contributing to our local and national economies.
Comprehensive reform will provide cities and towns with the support needed to integrate immigrants into their communities and allow them to make both cultural and economic contributions to the nation.
Immigration Reform Facts and Figures
• Passing the DREAM Act would add $329 billion to the U.S. economy, create 1.4 million new jobs by 2030 and result in an additional $5.6 billion in state and federal household income tax revenue (Partnership for a New American Economy, Center for American Progress)
• Immigrant business owners contribute more than $775 billion dollars in revenue to our annual Gross Domestic Product and employ I out of every IO American workers at privately-owned companies across the country. (Partnership for a New American Economy)
• Despite accounting for just 12.9 percent of the U.S. population, immigrants started 28 percent of all new U.S. businesses in 2011. (Partnership for a New American Economy) • In the 25 largest metropolitan areas combined, foreign-born workers are responsible for 20 percent of economic output and make up 20 percent of the population. (Keystone Research Center) Request for Congress and the Administration
➔ Immigration has been a source of innovation and economic growth throughout the nation's history. ➔ The debate in · states across the nation and in the courts demonstrates the urgent need for comprehensive immigration refonn at the federal level.
➔ Congress' failure to act is hanning communities. It is imperative that Washington act now to pass comprehensive immigration reform.
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 547 of 651
ATTACHMENT 8
1400 K Street, Suite 400 • Sacramento, California 95814 Phone: 916.658.8200 Fax: 916.658.8240
www.cacities.org
July 22, 2013
The Honorable Dianne Feinstein
United States Senate
331 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 2051 0 •
RE: Refonn of Federal Immigration Laws
Dear Senator Feinstein:
As Congress moves forward with reform of our immigration laws, I am writing on behalf of the League of California Cities (League) to urge your support for prompt action on this legislation in concert with the principles laid out below. Like the National League of Cities and many others • across our nation, the board of directors of the League believes it should be an urgent priority of Congress to enact comprehensive immigration reform. Every day city officials and staff are affected by the current dysfunction in our immigration system, and the need for action if critical.
The League of California Cities supports the following federal Immigration Reform Principles with the highest priority attached to No. 2, with a particular focus on the urgency of eliminating illegal entry at the borders.
1. Prompt Action Needed. Congress should move quickly to enact comprehensive reform of the current immigration laws with support of the Administration to implement the immigration laws effectively.
2. Consistent Federal Enforcement Required. The federal government should enforce its current immigration laws consistently and vigorously to eliminate illegal entry at the borders, visa overstays, working without proper documentation, and employing undocumented workers.
3. Increased Enforcement of Visa Laws Required. The federal government must increase enforcement of visa overstays through the full implementation and staffing of the US-VISIT and SEVIS programs.
4. Do Not Mandate Local Enforcement of Federal Immigration Laws. Local personnel, such as police officers, fire inspectors, educators, health personnel and social service personnel, should not be conscripted into federal service because the federal government has not adequately funded and staffed its immigration enforcement agencies; and the federal government must not transfer the res1>9nsibility of enforcing U.S. immigration laws to local personnel by making undocumented status in the U.S. a criminal offense.
5. Increase Worksite Enforcement; Modernize Verification System. The federal government must strengthen its worksite enforcement capacity and dramatically increase enforcement efforts at places of employment, as well as providing employers with a universal, reliable, effective, secure, non-discriminatory, and non-counterfeitable employee verification system, using the most up-to-date technology that will minimize fraud.
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 548 of 651
6. Provide Efficient Process for Securing Visas and Legal Permanent Residency. The federal government must increase. its capacity and fnfrastructure to enforce the laws and provide efficient means for foreign nationals to obtain legal authorization for temporary visas or legal permanent residency.
7. Improve Process for Temporary Workers, and to Become Legal Resident or Citizen. The federal government must provide an appropriate, legal means of immigration, as is determined to be necessary and effective for the United States, for foreign nationals that want to work .here temporarily, become legal permanent residents, or gain citizenship.
8. Provide Path to Legal Status and Citizenship With Strict Conditions. The federal government should establish a process whereby undocumented immigrants currently living in the United States may earn legalized status through ' payment of appropriate fees and back taxes, background _checks, absence of criminal or gang activity, consistent work history, and meeting English and civics requirements; and that the immigrants who have earned such legal status should also be able to apply for citizenship through additional processes, as appropriate and practical, as long as they do not move ahead of applicants with proper documentation waiting to adjust their status or those waiting on lists in their home countries.
9. Assist Local Governments Affected by New lmmigrai:,ts. The federal government should provide local governments with financial and technical assistance to alleviate the local impact of new immigrants, including the costs of providing social services, health care, educati9n, language services, and civic integration. • •
Thank you for your attention-to the concerns of California cities on this important matter. Please let me know if you have any questions or need any additional information. You can also contact the League's Washington advocate, Eve O'Toole, at (202) 419-2505. We look forward to continuing to work with you on California's important local priority issues.
Sincerely,
cl~~
Chris McKenzie
Executive Director
c. National League of Cities •
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 549 of 651
- -;·
Working towards a fair and humane path to Citizenship
Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles
CHIRLA
> -4
-4
>
0 :c
I:
i
-4
0 April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 550 of 651 • In California there are an estimated 2.6 million
undocumented immigrants
• Immigrants are 34% of the California's workforce
- 9% of the workforce in unauthorized
• Immigrants in California contribute 33% to the State's Domestic GDP
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 551 of 651
I
;
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg
-- --
• 11% of the Los Angeles County workforce is undocumented • 20% of children in Los Angeles County have at least one undocumented parent
• According to the 2010 Census, the city of Pasadena was made up of 31% of foreign born persons
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 553 of 651
- combined
• Since 2008 almost 2 million people have been
deported
• In one year, California deported nearly 90,000 people under the Secure Communities program
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 554 of 651
---=-------- ----------------------------- --- -
• Creating immigration reform legislation without crafting a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants
creates a permanent second class status for these
Aspiring Americans
• Undocumented immigrants are already contributing to
the country but can contribute so much more with a legal status
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 555 of 651
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg
- ----- ... - - - -- '
• Only 17% of undocumented Californians own a
home compared to 36% of non-naturalized,
documented immigrants and 64% of
citizens
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 557 of 651
- -
• The business ownership rate is higher for immigrants than the native-born, with 10.5% of the immigrant work force owning a business compared with 9.3% of the native-born work force • Roughly one out of ten immigrant workers owns a business April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 558 of 651
• • .111-rr:.cc: 1'.0
businesses
• Access to educational benefits for DREAMers and
beyond
• Better worker protection and fewer cases of wage
theft and worker intimidation
• Living without fear of deportation
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 559 of 651
- - - - -- --~-
- 39" Latino
- 13.4% African-American
- 12.7% Asian
• The proportion of those speaking a language other than English at home is 44.9%
- 16.6% of those do not speak English well
• 60% of Pasadena Unified School District student body is Latino I iffi.
... Jilj\L_. ~~& ., ~l!CIH:i:JY ~ ' •
Source: http://www.d.pasadena.ea.us/Pasadena_Facts_and_Statlstlcs April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 560 of 651
ALL SAINTS CHURCH
October 25, 2013
Dear Members of the Pasadena •City Council:
On behalf of the Vestry and members of All Saints Church, I would like express our whole-hearted support for the Resolution of the City Council Supporting a Humane and Comprehensive Immigration Reform, as recommended to you for consideration by the City's Legislative Policy Committee, and which is coming before you for a vote on Monday, October 28, 2013. At All Saints Church we have been actively engaged with other faith partners and advocacy organizations in calling on Congress to enact comprehensive, just, and humane immigration reform for many years. In 2008, the All Saints Church Vestry, our church's decision-making body, passed such a resolution for comprehensive immigration reform, and this document has since guided our efforts on this critical humanitarian and social issue. Our resolution is included here for your . reference.
The impact of our broken immigration system is disproportionately felt regionally and locally-nearly .1 million undocumented immigrants reside in Los Angeles County. One in five children in Los Angeles County have at least one undocumented parent. As the proposed city resolution before you well indicates, Pasadena is a city with a significant immigrant population, with over a third of its residents being foreign-born. Immigrant families live, work, worship and play alongside the rest of us in this great city. Our city and faith communities are enriched by the presence of these families economically, socially, and culturally. However many of them still live as second-class citizens, as they lack full access to all aspects of our democratic, social, and economjc institutions.
While the passing of comprehensive immigration reform is a federal decision, it would be a powerful statement of support and solidarity for the city of Pasadena to acknowledge the plight of the many immigrant families within its city boundaries, and would contribute to current national efforts to make reform a reality in this legislative term.
n, Jr.
nts Church
'
10/28/2013
Itea 17
132 NORTH EUCLID AVEN UE, PASADENA. CALIFORNIA 91101-1796 tel 626.796.1172 - fax 626.796.4749 - w w w.al lsaints- pas.o rg April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 561 of 651
We are, all of us, in some sense immigrants and s~journcrs. strangers in a strange land seeking a homeland. Some of us or members of our families have personally experienc.ed hardships and. at times. unspeakable indignities, in coming to America. Others of us fot1lmate 10 have been born here have trekked i1\to the dese1t wilderness 10 see for ourselves the migrant path of tears and triumph. We felt the sand beneath our teet. We saw the abandoned water bottles and children's backpacks amid 1he cactus thorns. We listened to their stories. We.touched the cold steel of border walls. We prayed in the presence of border guards. Now, we are once again called by Christ to love our neighbors as ourselves. As a people of faith commiued to dismantling oppressive systems and building structures and communities 1hat reflect God's compassion and justice. we must do no less than make straight a highway in lhe desert for our sisters and brothers.
RESOLUTION ON COMPREHENSIVE IMMIGRATION REFORM
Adopted by the Veslly of All Saints Church. Pasadena, on Oclober 7, 2008 Whereas, the Holy Scriptures make known to us that we are created "in the image of God" (Genesis I :26-27) and that one of our great commandments from Jesus is to "Love your neighbor as yourself (Mark 12:28-31 );"
Whereas, the Vision Statement of All Saints Church calls on us to "embody the inclusive love of God in Christ through Spirituality, Community and Peace & Justice;" Whereas, All Saints Church is committed to dismantling oppressive systems and to building structures and communities that reflect God's compassion and justice; Whereas,,AII Saints Church participated in the Sanctuary Movement during the 1980s in solidarity with Central American immigrant refugees fleeing their war-torn countries of origin; Whereas, the current immigration system is broken and the crisis continues to worsen with increased enforcement-only actions such as workplace raids and border mil itarization; Now, Therefore be it resolved that the Vestry of All Saints Church urges the President and Congress to adopt compre~ensive immigration reforms that promote a more humane immigration system consistent with our faith and values and that include the following:
I . A clear and workable path to citizenship for immigrants already in the U.S.
2. Refonns in the family-based immigration system which promote family reunification and reduce the waiting times for separated families
3. Legal protections and due process rights for all persons and labor protections for all workers regardless of immigration status
4. Reforms to eliminate existing barriers to naturalization and reduce the backlog in the naturalization process; and
I
I
I
I
I
• I
I
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 562 of 651
Now, Therefore be it resolved that the Vestry of All Saints Church calls on the Paris·h to:
I . Participate in educational events and forums, such as those developed by the All Saints Immigration Task Force, partner ministries~ and community allies, to learn about the plight of immigrants, to listen to people's experiences of enforcement and its impact on their lives and families, to learn about the root causes of migration, and to discuss long-term solutions to the immigration crisis both in the U.S. and abroad; and
2. Join the parish Immigration Task Force and community-wide organizations in supporting vigils, fasts, marches and advocacy campaigns for comprehensive immigration reform, and provide pastoral support and assistance to immigrants with special needs, such as those who cannot support their families; are ineligible for government-funded services. seek protection from detention and deportation. or whose parents or spouse have been detained or deported due to their unlawfol immigration status. •
Background
As a church and as a nation we are confronted by a humanitarian crisis. where human anguish, oppression, inhospitality, and the deaths of thousands betray our hi_ghest ideals as people of faith and citizens of the United States.
At the heai1 of this crisis are immigration laws, which understandably seek to enhance border security in a time of transnational criminal enterprises and terrorism. but fail to offer a timely, workable and legal framework so that millions of hard working and honest immigrants residing in the U.S. may remain in the U.S. kgally without tear of deportation .. and others may enter legally to live, work, and contribute to the U.S. economy. Meanwhile. global economics and unfair trade policies c~mtinue to push people out of their homelands and pull them into another.
Absent comprehensive immigration reform. narrowly drawn immigration laws which seek to respond to fears but not to human hopes are self-de.feating. History teaches and our faith proclaims that the human spirit will not forever be bound by walls, whether those ofcold steel and 1:azor wire. or those which hobble the human heaf-t. Desperation born of abject poverty and in)ustice abroad dares to hope.
Love seeks to reunite families separated by the need of a provider to ea111 their daily bread, or splintered by imprisonment and deportation for those who are caught.
It is a costly hope.
It is a costly love.
Since 1994, when the U.S. stepped·up security more than 4,000 migrant men, wom~n and children have died crossing the U.S-Mexico border. The Government Accot'llltability Office-the watchdog agency of the United States Congress-has repo11ed that by 2005. annual deaths had doubled to 472. By comparison. the number of people killed trying to cross the communist-era Berlin Wall between I 961 and 1989 was an estimated 263, of which 125 were confirmed by researchers. When people do get across, their journey is far from over as they encounter a world full of alienation and unce11ainty. Lacking legal recourse or labor protections, many undocumented workers go to work each day fearing a workplace • raid, and come home with the threat of ICE agents knocking on their door. This fear is magnified for LGBT immigrants, who face discrimination and lack of protection on multiple fronts.
As people of faith, we must choose a different path. We will choose to love at all costs. We will say no more to the deaths at the border. and no more to the tear of living in-the shadows.
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 563 of 651
!
JUDY CHU, Ph.D.
27TH DISTRICT, CALIFORNIA
COMMITTEE ON
THE JUDICIARY
SUBCOMMITTEE ON .
CAIME, TEAAORISM. HOME LANO SECURITY
ANO INVESTIGATIONS
SUBCOMMITTEE·ON
COURTS, !NTELlECTUAL PROPERTY
ANO THE INTERNET
COMMITTEE ON
SMALL BUSINESS
RANKING MEMBER. SUBCOMMITTEE ON ECONOMIC GAO'NTH. TAX ,_NO CAPITAL ACCESS
SUBCOMMITTEE ON
CONTRACTING ANO WORKFORCE
City of Pasadena
100 N. Garfield Ave.,
Pasadena, CA 91109
<!Congress of tbe Wntttb ~tatts
1!,oust of l\epttstntatibts
Dmsbington. 1.DCLC·20515
October 25, 2013
RE: Support for the City of Pasadena's Resolution on Immigration Refonn • Dear Mayor and Councilmembers:
WASHINGTON OFFICE:
1520 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, OC 20515
(202) 225-5464
(202) 225-5467 (Fax)
PASADENA DISTRICT OFFICE:
527 South Lake Avenue, Suite 106
Pasadena, CA 91101
(626} 304--0110
I write in support of the Resolution that is before the Pasadena City Council today, which recognizes the need and importance of comprehensive immigration reform. I strongly believe that all Americans who love this country deserve a common sense immigration process, one that includes a clear roadmap for people who aspire to be citizens. • •
As a member of the Judiciary Committee, which·has jurisdiction over immigration reform, passing a comprehensive immigration bill that keeps families together and includes a clear roadmap to citizenship is one ofmy top priorities. This is why I joined four ofmy Democratic colleagues to introduce H.R. 15, the Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Moderniz.ation Act. This bill combines the bipartisan bill that passed the Senate earlier this year with a border protec~ion bill that passe_d unanimously in the House Homeland Security Committee. Over 180 Democratic members have signaled their support for comprehensive immigration reform by cosponsoring our bill.
This bill is by no means perfect. Like any compromise, we lost good provisions to the give and take of negotiations. But we cannot allow the perfect to be the enemy of the good. The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that the Senate bill would reduce our deficits by $850 billion, and improve Social Security's short- and long-term solvency. The economic benefits are coupled with the hwnan impact of finally creating an immigration system that does not keep families apart or push bright minds away.
We waited three long decades to reform our immigration Jaws. The time to act is now. I urge the passage of the Resolution and commend the Pasadena City Council for its leadership in recognizing the importance of restoring one of our nations's founding principles - to leave our country better off not just for the next generation, but also for our newcomers.
Sincerely,
JUDY CHU, Ph.D. • •
Member of Congress, 27th ·District, California
www.chu.house.gov
10/28/2013
Item 17
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 564 of 651
October 28, 2013
City of Pasadena, Mayor Bill Bogaard and City Council
Pasadena City Hall Council Chambers - Room 24 7
100 N. Garfield Ave.
Pasadena, CA 91109
Re: Comprehensive Immigration Reform Resolution
Position: SUPPORT
Dear Mayor Bogaard and Pasadena City Council Members,
We the undersigned community organizations, representing a broad sector of the city of Pasadena are urging the City of Pasadena to voice its support of humane immigration reform. Each of us has been involved in the national efforts to urge Congress to overhaul our broken immigration system. It is in this spirit and because of the work we have done and the community members we serve that we urge the council to support a city resolution authored by Vice Mayor Jacque Robinson, urging Congress to enact Comprehensive Immigration Reform. The city will join other localities including our state on calling on the federal government to enact immigration reform this year.
Our current immigration system is broken, antiquated and does not meet the challenges of the 21st century. It separates families, creates long backlogs for families who are seeking reunification. Further, it neglects the hard work and financial contributions immigrants make to our country. Since 2008 close to 2 million immigrants have been deported, and one in every ten American children faces the threat of deportation of a parent. This system is tearing our families and communities apart
While it is estimated that about 11 million undocumented immigrants are in the United States, California has the largest population of immigrants, botll legal and undocumented.
Los Angeles County alone is home to nearly 1 million undocumented immigrants and 20 percent of children in Los Angeles County have at least one undocumented parent The economic benefits of supporting a comprehensive solution with a pathway to citizenship are great Citizens go on to become successful small business owners, providing jobs and revenue in their communities. • Citizens also on average have higher rates of income than non-citizens and access to "good jobs." All of these things help our communities grow.
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 565 of 651
We urge you to support this resolution. The Resolution is simply a call to action to· congress to act this year. It is a call for Congress to find a solution to this every growing issue, a call for congress to find a solution that will keep our communities and families safe from the devastation caused by deportation and a call for a solution that will allow undocumented immigrants in this country to come out of the shadows and begin down a proud pathway to citizenship.
Sincerely,
All Saints Episcopal Parish
All Saints Peace and Justice Committee
Pasadena en Espanol, Isabel Ramirez
Pasadena Latino Coalition
Pasadena Youth Center, Stella Murga
Pasadena Jewish Temple arid Center
Greater Pasadena Jews for Justice
Rabbi Joshua Levine Grater
Pastor Ricardo Moreno
Pasadena Presbyterian Church
Pasadena Altadena Coalition of Transformative Leaders
Pasadena Latino Forum
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 566 of 651
SEE ADOPTED RESOL TUION No. 9319
RESOLUTION No.
SOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASADENA SUPPORTING A
HUMANE AND COMPREHENSIVE IMMIGRATION REFORM PROPOSAL
S, The United States of America is a nation of values, founded on the principles women are created equal, and promise of freedom for all; AND WHEREAS, he current immigration system is broken, antiquated and not meeting the challenges of the 21 century. It separates families, creates long backlogs for families. who are seeking reunification. rther, it neglects the hard work and financial contributions immigrants make to our country; an
. WHEREAS, since 20 more than-1.6 million immigrants have been deported; and one in every ten American children fa • s the threat of deportation of a parent; AND WHEREAS, It is estimate that about 11 million undocumented· immigrants are in the United States, and California ha the largest population of • immigrants, both legal and undocumented; AND
WHEREAS, The President of th United States implemented the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals ·. (DACA) and The • ration Policy Institute estimates that 460,000 Californians qualify ·tor DACA and the Unite tates Citizenship and Immigration Services has reported that 152, ·855 Californians have apph d as of June 30th 2013. This is a step in the right direction but, it is not enough; AND
WHEREAS, One in 10 workers. in Califo ,a ts an undocumented immigrant, and • immigrants are a vibrant, productive, and vital part of e state's growing economy, holding jobs in areas such as food preparation, IT!achine operations, construction, domestic and household services and general sales; AND •
WHEREAS, the White House reports that a ·compr ensive immigration reform with a pathway to citizenship would, over 10 years, boc;>st U.S. G by $1.4 trillion, increase total income for all Americans by $791 billion, generate $184 billion i additional state and federal tax revenue from currently undocumented immigrants, and add ab ut. 2 million jobs · to the U.S. economy.
WHEREAS, Los Angeles County is home to nearly 1 million u documented immigrants and 20 percent of children in Los Angeles County have at least one undo mented parent; AND WHEREAS, the San Gabriel Valley and the city of Pasadena are home to an ever gro~ing, diverse population of immigrant families who work and contribute t the city and the region; AND
WHEREAS, ijccording to the 2010 Census, the city of Pasadena was made foreign born persons; AND
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 567 of 651
WHEREAS, the City of Pasadena has adopted as part of the 2013 Federal Legislative Pl om, that we strongly believes that immigrants strengthen the community economically and cultu lly, and welcomes their contributions to society. With regard to federal legislation aimed at refo ing federal immigration laws, the City would urge Congress and the President to reaffirm at addressing unlawful immigration in a compassionate manner is the primary responsibi11 of the federal government, and that sufficient resources must be committed on the federal level r this purpose; AND
NOW, TH EFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that by the adoption of this Resolution, the City of Pasadena heretj supports a humane and comprehensive immigration reform proposal with • the following principle : provides an attainable and affordable pathway to full citizenship for the nearly 11 million i.mdoc ented immigrants in the United States; family unity as a cornerstone of our immigration syste • provides due process and labor protections; allows access to key essential services such as ealth care; a·nd local governments should not be mandated to enforce federal i_mmigration la s, particularly when resources necessary to enforce local laws are already stretched.
Adopted by the following vote at them ·ng of the City Council on· September 30, 2012 AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
Approved as to Form:
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 568 of 651
ATTACHMENT B
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 569 of 651
(Propos·ed) Pasadena Police Department
111'.lmigration Status and Bias-Free Policing Policy
Purposes
The City of Pasadena ("the City") is home to people from all walks of life, of different races, religions, sexual orientations, and national and • ethnic origins. The Department values and celebrates this diversity, which makes our community strong and_ vibrant.
A relationship of trust between the Pasadena Police Department ("the Department") and the City's residents, regardless of race, religion, sexual orientation, national origin, ethnicity, or immigration status, is essential for accomplishing core Department functions, including protecting the safety and civil and human rights of all residents.
The enforcement of federal immigration law falls exclusively within the authority of the federal government. The Department will not engage in law enforcement activities based solely on someone's immigration status.
The Department' does not work together with federal immigration authorities, including the Department of Homeland Security's immigration enforcement agency Immigration and Customs Enforcement ("~CE") on deportation efforts. That is not the job of the Pasadena Police Department.
The Department's commitment to equal enforcement of the law and equal service to the public regardless of immigration status increases the Department's effectiveness in protecting and serving the entire Pasadena com~unity. All individuals, regardless of immigration status, should feel secure that contacting law enforcement will not make them vulnerable to harassment, arrest, or deportation.
Voluntary assistance in the enforcement of federal civil immigration law would drain already-limited Department resources; detract from the Department's core mission to create safe communities; and make it difficult to maintain trust between the Department and the City's residents, thereby threatening the safety and well-being of City residents.
Ass,istance irt the enforcement of immigration law could also lead to profiling based on race, ethnicity, and national origin in violation of the United States and California Constitutions and state and federal antidiscrimination laws.
The City of Pasadena recognizes the United States Supreme Court's April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 570 of 651
pronouncement in Arizona v. United States v. Arizona, 132 S. Ct. 2492 . (2012), that removal is a civil matter and that state officers generally may not arrest immigrants based solely on possible removability. Moreover, there is a growing public policy in the State of California to disentangle ICE deportation programs from local law enforcement agencies and to increase the transparency and accountability of immigration enforcement in the state.
Policy
1. The Department is committed to equal enforcement of the law and equal service to the public regardless of race, nationality, ethnicity, or immigration status.
2. The Department is committed to bias-free policing.
3. The immigration status of individuals is not a matter for police action . . 4. The Department shall investigate criminal activity without regard to an individual's actual or perceived immigration status.
5. The enforcement of civil and criminal federal immigration laws falls exclusively withiri the authority of the federal government.
6. The Department shall not initiate police action with the objective of discovering an individual's immigration status.
7. The Department shall not attempt to determine the immigration status of crime victims, witnesses, suspects, or arrestees unless necessary to perform Department duties or required by law. •
8. The Department shall not conduct or participate in efforts to enforce federal immigration law. The Department shall not undertake joint efforts or investigations with federal, state or local law enforcement agencies, to investigate, detain or arrest individuals for violations of federal immigration law. The Department shall terminate as soon as possible any contracts or memoranda of understanding with federal immigration authorities, including ICE, and shall not enter into any new such contracts or memoranda of understanding. To the maximum extent permitted by law, the nepartment shall not have contact with federal immigration authorities. The Department shall work with other federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies to attempt to obtain agreements, memoranda of understandings, 01: other arrangements that minimize residents exposure to federal immigration enforcement.
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 571 of 651
9. The Department shall not investigate, detain, arrest, or book an individual for violations of federal criminal immigration law, including Title 8, Sections 1304, 1325 or 1326 of the United States Immigration Code.
10. The Department shall not permit any collateral arrests for immigration enforcement purposes in connection with Department operations.
Procedure
1. Protection of Sensitive Information.
A. No Department officer, employee or agent shall request • citizenship or immigration status information about any individual unless necessary to perform Department duties or required by law .
. B-. Where citizenship or immigration status information is collected, Department officers, employees or agents may use and
disseminate the information only to the extent necessary to accomplish the Department duties for which the information was requested or maintained, or where required by law.
C. This section shall not prevent the Department from responding to a request for assistance from residents to obtain a benefit under federal immigration law, such as 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(15)(U), 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(15)(T)
2. Immigration Enforcement.
A. In connection with the Department's commitment to bias-free policing, no Department monies, facilities, property, equipment or personnel shall be used for immigration enforcement, including but not limited to:
I. Identifying, investigating, arresting, detaining or assisting in the identification, investigation, arrest or detention of any person on the basis of a suspected violation of
immigration law;
11. Responding to any civil immigration warrant or request, for immigration purposes, to detain or notify federal
authorities about the release of any individual;
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 572 of 651
111. Making individuals in Department custody available to federal immigration authorities for intertjews for
immigration purposes; and
iv. Providing federal authorities with non-publicly available information about any individual for immigration
purposes, including by providing access to Department
databases, except where required by state or federal law.
B. Nothing in this section shall prevent the City from responding to a lawfully-issued judicial criminal warrant, or court order issued by a federal or state judge.
3. Training and Oversight.
A. !
C.
D.
The Department shall develop training protocols to implement this policy.
The Department shall document in writing all contacts with federal immigration authorities. This includes all phone calls, all emails, all requests to use money, facilities, property, equipment, personnel, or databases, or to receive non-publicly available .information about any individual. The documenting shall include the time and date of contact, the identities of the Department officer and immigration officials, and the specific purpose and outcome of the contact. This written record shall be considered a public record ·pursuant to the California Public Records Act ("CPM") that is exempt from any exception to the CPRA to the maximum extent permitted by law.
The City's Internal Auditor shall conduct regular and periodic audits of all contacts with federal immigration authorities and report his/her findings in writing to the City Manager and the City Council's Public Safety Committee.
The Department shall create a new bias category of
"immigration bias." The Department shall investigate and resolve complaints of immigration bias consistent with its biased policing protocols. The Department shall include its • findings of "immigration bias" complaints in its reports to the City Council's Public Safety Committee.
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 573 of 651
Construction
This policy is to be construed in accordance with 8 U.S.C. § 1373(a) which provides "Notwithstanding any other provision of Federal, State, or local law, a Federal, State, or local government entity or official may not prohibit, or in any way restrict, any government entity or official from sending to, or receiving from, [ICE] information regarding the citizenship or immigration status, lawful or unlawful, of any individual." April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 574 of 651
ATTACHMENT C
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 575 of 651
Policy
428 Immigration Policy
428.1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE
· The purpose of this policy is to provide guidelines to members of the Pasadena Police Department when contacting persons who are or may be residing in the United States while undocumented and to reaffirm equal enforcement of the law and equal service to the public regardless of immigration status.
428.2 POLICY
It is the expectation that Pasadena Police Department members will enforce the law equally and will not engage in law enforcement activities based solely on someone's immigration status.
Members of the Pasadena Police Department shall not contact, stop, detain, investigate or arrest persons exclusively on their immigration status, with the narrow exception of investigations involving national security concerns such as terrorism or transnational criminal activity ( e.g. human, drug or weapon trafficking). The Pasadena Police Department will continue to enforce all applicable local and state laws; however, people living in, working, or visiting our community will not be subject to scrutiny by the Pasadena Police Department solely based on their immigration status. Confidence in this commitment will increase the effectiveness of this department in protecting and serving the entire community and recognizing the dignity of all persons, regardless of their immigration status or national origin.
428.3 VICTIMS AND WITNESSES
To encourage crime reporting and cooperation in the investigation of criminal activity, all individuals, regardless of their immigration status or national origin, must feel secure that contacting or being addressed by members of law enforcement will not automatically lead to immigration inquiry and/or deportation. While it may be necessary. to determine the identity of a victim or witness, members shall treat all individuals equally and without regard to race, color or national origin in any way that would violate the United States or California Constitutions. All individuals, regardless of immigration status, should feel secure that contacting the Pasadena Police Department will not make them vulnerable to harassment, arrest or deportation. 428.4 CIVIL VS. CRIMINAL FEDERAL OFFENSES
An individual non-US citizen who enters into the United States without the proper visa or immigration documents has committed a federal misdemeanor (8 USC § 1325(a)). Generally, an individual who.initially made a legal entry into the United States but remained beyond the time approved in their documents has committed a federal civil offense. The investigation and prosecution of violations of civil and criminal federal immigration law falls within the authority of the federal government.
Despite the fact that an individual's immigration status may reveal itself during an investigation, it is not the Pasadena Police Department's duty to determine the immigration status of crime victims, witnesses, suspects or arrestees. Unless required by law, or the narrow .exception of investigations involving national security concerns such as terrorism or transnational criminal activity ( e.g. 3/1/2017
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 576 of 651
human, drug or weapon trafficking), the Department shall not investigate, detain, arrest or book any individual solely for federal criminal or civil immigration law even when undocumented status has been revealed.
428.5 ARREST NOTIFICATION TO IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT Except as may be required by law, it is not the practice of the Pasadena Police Department to notify Immigration and Customs Enforcement ("ICE") when booking arrestees.
No individual who is otherwise ready to be.released should continue to be detained solely for the purpose of making notification to immigration authorities except to the extent required by law. 428.6 ICE REQUESTS FOR ASSISTANCE
Requests by ICE, or other federal ~gency, for assistance from the Department should be directed to a supervisor. The Department may provide to ICE or other federal agency the same, available, ancillary support services, such as traffic control or peacekeeping efforts, to protect the general public as the Department would provide based upon an incident dispatch made on complaint or request of any member of the public or inter-agency assist. To the maximum extent permitted by law, the Department shall not directly assist ICE in investigating, detaining or arresting individuals solely for violations of federal immigration law. The Department shall cooperate with ICE to the extent required by law and in efforts to investigate and to apprehend individuals in the United States that present national security concerns involving terrorism or transnational criminal activity such as human, drug or weapon trafficking.
428.7 INFORMATION SHARING
Federal law explicitly precludes the Pasadena Police Department from prohibiting, or in any way restricting, any individual (including any member of the Department) from doing any of the following regarding the citizenship or immigration status, lawful or unlawful, of any individual (8 USC§ 1373):
a) Sending information to, or requesting or receiving such information from ICE; b) Maintaining such information in department records;
c) Exchanging such information with any other federal, state or local government entity. 428.7.1 IMMIGRATION HOLDS
Individuals should not be held iri custody in the Pasadena City jail solely for a civil immigration hold under 8 USC§ 287.7 unless pursuant to court order. 428.7.2 NOTICE TO INDIVIDUALS
Individuals shall be given a copy of documentation received from Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) regarding a hold, notification or transfer request-along with information as to whether the Pasadena Police Department intends to comply with the request (Government Code § 7283.1).
If the Pasadena Police Department is required to provide ICE with notification that an undocumented person is being, or will be, released on a certain date, the same notification shall be 3/1/2017
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 577 of 651
provided in writing to the individual and to his/her attorney or to one additional person who the individual may designate (Government Code§ 7283.1).
428.7.3 ICE INTERVIEWS
Before any interview between ICE personnel and an individual in custody for federal civil immigration violations, the Pasadena Police Department shall provide the individual with a written consent form that explains the purpose of the interview, that the interview is voluntary and that he/she may decline to be interviewed or may choose to be interviewed only with his/her attorney present. The consent form must be available in the languages specified in Governtnent Code § 7283.l.
428.8 U VISA AND T VISA PROTECTION FOR CERTAIN VICTIMS AND WITNESSES
WHO ARE UNDOCUMENTED
Under certain circumstances, federal law allows temporary immigration benefits, known as a U visa, to victims and witnesses of certain qualifying crimes (8 USC § 1101 (a){l 5)(U)). In order for a U visa to be issued, a law enforcement certification should be completed by the Lieutenant assigned to Crimes Against Persons with review by the Criminal Investigations Division Commander, and approval by the Chief of Police.
Similar immigration protection, known as a T visa, is available for certain qualifying victims of human trafficking (8 USC § 1101 (a)(l 5)(U)). In order for a T visa to be issued, a law enforcement declaration should be completed by the Lieutenant assigned to Crimes Against Persons with review by the Criminal Investigations Division Commander, and approval by the Chief of Police.
Any request for assistance in applying for U visa or T visa status should be forwarded in a timely manner to the Lieutenant assigned to Crimes Against Persons. This Lieutenant shall:
a) Consult with the assigned investigator to determine the current status of any related case and whether further documentation is warranted. •
b) Contact the appropriate prosecutor assigned to the case, if applicable, to ensure the certification or declaration has not already been completed and whether a certification or declaration is warranted.
c) Address the request and complete the certific.ation or declaration, if appropriate, in a timely, manner.
I. The instructions for completing certification and declaration forms can be found on the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) website.
2. Form 1-918 Supplement B certification shall be completed if the victim qualifies under Penal Code§ 679.10 (multiple serious offenses). Form 1-914 Supplement B certification shall be completed if the victim qualifies under Penal Code § 236.5 or • Penal Code § 679 .11 (Human Trafficking).
d) Ensure that any decision to complete, or not complete, a certification or declaration form is documented in the case file and for.warded to the appropriate prosecutor. Include a copy of any completed form in the case file.
e) Inform the victim liaison of any requests and their status. 3/1/2017
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 578 of 651
428.8.l TIME FRAMES FOR U VISA AND T VISA APPLICATION COMPLETION Officers and their supervisors who are assigned to investigate a case of human trafficking as defined by Penal Code § 236.1 shall complete the above process and submit the T visa application to the Lieutenant assigned to Crimes Against Persons within 15 business days of the first encounter with the victim, regardless of whether it is requested by the victim (Penal Code § 236.5).
Officers and their supervisors shall complete the above process and the documents needed for a U visa or T visa application to the Lieutenant assigned to Crimes Against Persons pursuant to Penal Code § 679 .10 and Penal Code § 679 .11 within 90 days of a request from the victim or victim's family related to one of their assigned cases. If the victim is in removal proceedings, the certification shall be processed within 14 days of the request. 428.8.2 REPORTING TO LEGISLATURE
The Custodian of Records or the authorized designee should ensure that certification requests are reported to the Legislature in January of each year and include the number of certifications signed and the number denied. The report shall comply with Government Code § 9795 (Penal Code § 679. IO; Penal Code § 679. I { ).
, • 428.9 TRAINING
The Training Sergeant and the Jail Administrator shall ensure that all appropriate members receive immigration training.·
3/1/2017
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 579 of 651
ATTACHMENT D
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 580 of 651
Pasadena City Resolution
RESOLUTION NO. XXXXX
.A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
PASADENA, CALIFORNIA TO WELCOME, PROTECT AND DEFEND ALL
RESIDENTS BY MAKING PASADENA A SANCTUARY CITY
WHEREAS, Pasadena is home to people from all walks of life, of different races, religions, sexual orientations, and national and ethnic origins. The City values and celebrates.this diversity, which makes our community and our economy strong and vibrant;
WHEREAS, a relationship of trust between the City and all residents, regardless of race, religion, sexual orientation, national origin, ethnicity, or immigration status, is essential for accomplishing core City functions, including protecting the safety and civil and human rights of all residents; •
WHEREAS, this trust is threatened when the City is entangled with federal immigration enforcement programs, with the result that immigrant community members fear approaching police when they are victims of, and witnesses to, crimes; seeking basic services; and attending school, to the detriment of the public safety and well-being of all City residents.
WHEREAS; the enforcement of federal civil immigration law falls exclusively within the authority of the federal government. No City department, agency, or commission, including the Pasadena Police Department, has any inherent authority or duty to investigate violations of federal civil immigration law or to assist in enforcement of such laws;
WHEREAS, the creation of a national registry based on religion or national origin would violate the City's core values ofreligious freedom and tolerance and would sow fear and concern among the City's residents of Muslim faith or Muslim~majority countries; • WHEREAS, voluntary assistance in the enforcement of federal civil immigration law or implementation of a national registry based on race, religion, sexual orientation, national origin, or ethnicity by City departments, agencies, and commissions would drain alreadylimited City r~sources, blur lines of accountability between our local and federal government, imperil effective policing, deter access.to basic services, and threaten the safety and well-being of City residents.
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASADENA AS FOLLOWS:
Section I: The City Council of the City of Pasadena, California, hereby finds, determines and declares as follows:
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 581 of 651
Pasadena City Resolution
Protection of Residents' Personal Information. In order to ensure that eligible individuals are not deterred from seeking services or engaging with City departments, agencies, or commissions, all City departments, agencies, or commissions shall review their confidentiality policies and identify any changes necessary to ensure that inf9rmation collected from individuals is limited to that necessary to perform their duties and is not used or disclosed for any other purpose. It shall be the policy of all City departments, agencies, and commissions not to provide non-publicly available information about any individual to any entity or official, including but not limited to any state or federal government agency or official, unless necessary to perform department, agency, or commission duties or required by law.
Section 2: The City Council of the City of Pasadena, California, hereby finds, determines and declares as follows:
Restriction on Use of City Law Enforcement Resources. The City shall adopt a policy affirming its commitment to bias-free policing and disallowing the use of any Pasadena Police Department monies, facilities, property, equipment or personnel for the following:
A. Immigration enforcement, including but not limited to:
(1) Identifying, investigating, arresting, detaining or assisting in the identification, investigation, arrest or detention of any person on the basis of a suspected violation of immigration law;
(2) Responding to any civil immigration warrant or request to detain, transfer or notify federal authorities about the release of any individual for immigration purposes;
(3) Making individuals in City custody available to federal immigration authorities for interviews for immigration purposes; and (4) Providing non-publicly available personal information about any individual, including, but not limited to, information about the person's release date, home address, or work address, for immigration purposes, including by providing access to City databases, except where required by law.
B. Enforcement of any federal program requiring the registration of individuals on the basis of religious affiliation, or national or ethnic origin.
C. Notwithstanding the above, and consistent with Sections 1373 and 1644 of Title 8 of the United States Code, nothing in this Section requires, prohibits or restricts any government entity or official from sending to, or receiving from, federal immigration authorities, information regarding the citizenship or immigration status, lawful or unlawful, of any individual, or from maintaining or exchanging information regarding the immigration status, lawful or unlawful, of any individual, with any other federal, state, or local government entity. This Section does not alter any existing confidentiality policies of the City.
Section 3: The City Council of the City of Pasadena, California, hereby finds, determines and declares as follows:
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 582 of 651
I
Pasadena City Resolution
Training and Oversight. To ensure meaningful implementation, the City will:
A. Develop a plan for dissemination of the policies described in Sections 1-2 above and appropriate training to ensure all relevant officers, employees and agents of the City understand their responsibilities.
B. Appoint a commission composed of directly impacted individuals from the community and their advocates, which will:
(1) advise the City on implementation of Sections 1-2 above; (2) monitor the City's activities on the matters described in Sections 1-2 above;and
(3) provide input on an accountability mechanism for resolving complaints of any violation of the policies described in Sections 1-2.
Section 4: The City Council of the City of Pasadena, California, hereby finds, determines and declares as follows: •
Defense of Sanctuary Designation. The City will resist any improper effort by the federal government to withhold or withdraw federal funding as a result of the City's policies to protect and defend its residents, including immigrants and members of religious minorities.
•
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 583 of 651
ATTACHMENT E
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 584 of 651
CITY OF PASADENA MANUAL OF PERSONNEL & ADMINISTRATIVE RULES SECTION 2 I CITY-WIDE POLICIES AND STANDARDS OF CONDUCT AA. STANDARD OF CONDUCT REGARDING CONFIDENTIALITY
Effective Date: March 6, 2017 I Supersedes: n/a
City Manager Approval:
1. During the course of employment, employees encounter people fro~ all walks of life, of different races, religions, sexual orientations, and national and ethnic origins and immigration status. The City values and celebrates this diversity. As a result, the City expects that all employees will treat its residents, customers, and all other people with whom employees conduct business and interact with dignity, respect, and professionalism.• The City• believes that affording our residents, customers, and all other people with whom employees conduct business and interact with this level of courtesy and respect is essential to delivering efficient public servkes, ensures opportunities for our youth, and ensures a high quality of life for our residents. •
This also promotes trust and cooperation between the City and its residents, customers, and employees who are encouraged to seek City services, programs, or employment with the confidence that the City prioritizes the provision of the excellent services and programs to all of its residents without fear of it resulting in adverse action because of race, religion, sexual orientation, national and ethnic origin or immigration status.
2. To meet this above stated requirement:
a. Employees must acknowledge that the City's priority is to provide excellent services and • programs to its residents and customers.
b. No city employee shall collect personal information from individuals beyond information necessary to perform their public duties and shall not disclose personal information for any other purpose unless required by federal or state statute, regulation or court decision. For the purposes of this section, personal information means religion, sexual orientation, national and ethnic origin and immigration status.
c. No City employee will use City funds or resources to assist in the enforcement of federal immigration law or to gather or disseminate information regarding the immigration status of individuals in the City unless such assistance is required by federal or state statute, regulation, or court decision. This includes:
i. Assisting or cooperating, in one's official capacity, with United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement ("ICE") investigation, detention, or arrest procedures, public or clandestine, relating to alleged violations of the civil provisions of the federal immigration law;
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 585 of 651
CITY OF PASADENA MANUAL OF PERSONNEL & ADMINISTRATIVE RULES SECTION 2 I CITY-WIDE POLICIES AND STANDARDS OF CONDUCT ii. Assisting or cooperating, in one's official capacity, with any investigation, surveillance or gathering of information conducted by foreign governments, except for cooperation related to an alleged violation of City and county, state or federal criminal laws. iii. Requesting information about, or disseminating information regarding, the citizenship status of any individual, or conditioning the provision of services or benefits by the City upon immigration status, except as required by Federal or State statute or regulation, City ordinance or-public assistance criteria, or court decision. iv. Including on any application, questionnaire or interview form used in relation to . benefits, services, or opportunities provided by the City, any question regarding citizenship status other than those required by federal or state statute, regulation or. court decision.
d. Employees are prohibited from inquiring into, maintaining, or disclosing sensitive information about residents except to the extent necessary to provide the City service in question or with the consent of the individual or as required by law. Sensitive information includes information of a personal nature or about private attributes, such as status as a victim of domestic violence or .sexual assault, status as a crime witness, sexual orientation, immigration status, disability status, or status as a recipient of public assist~nce.
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 586 of 651
,,
ATTACHMENT F
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 587 of 651
AMENDED IN SENATE MARCH q, 2017
A.MENDED IN SENATE MARCH 1, 2017
AMENDED IN SENATE JANUARY 24, 2017
SENATE BILL
Introduced by Senator De Leon
No. 54
(Principal coauthors: Senators Atkins, Pan, and Wiener) (Principal coauthors: Assembly Members Bonta, Chiu, Cooper, Gomez, Levine, and Reyes)
December 5, 2016
An act to add Chapter 17.25 (commencing with Section 7284) to Division 7 of Title 1 of the Government Code, to repeal Section 11369 of the Health and Safety Code, and to add Sectiops 3058.10 and 3058.11 to the Penal Code, relating to law enforcement, and declaring the urgency thereof, to take effect immediately.
LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST
SB 54, as amended, De Leon. Law enforcement: sharing data.
Existing law provides that when there is reason to believe that a person arrested for a violation of specified controlled substance provisions may not be a citizen of the United States, the arresting agency shall notify the appropriate agency of the United States having charge of deportation matters.
This bill would repeal those provisions.
Existing law provides that whenever an individual who is a victim of or witness to a hate crime, or who otherwise can give evidence in a hate crime investigation, is not charged with or convicted of committing any crime under state law, a peace officer may not detain the individual 96 April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 588 of 651 SB 54 -2-
exclusively for any actual or suspected immigration violation or report or turn the individual over to federal immigration authorities.
This bill would, among other things, prohibit state and local law enforcement ageneies mid agencies, including school police and security departments departments, from • using resources to investigate, interrogate, detain, detect, or arrest persons for immigration enforcement purposes, as specified. The bill would require, within 3 months after the effective date of the bill, the Attorney General, in consuitation with the appropriate stakeholders, to publish model policies limiting assistance with immigration enforcement to the fullest extent possible for use by those entities for those purposes. The bill would require all public schools, health facilities operated by the state or a political subdivision of the state, eottrthottses, and shelters and courthouses to implement the model policy, or an equivalent policy. The bill would state that all other organizations and entities that provide services related to physical or mental health and wellness, education, or access to justice, including the University of California, are encouraged to adopt the model policy. The bill would require a law enforcement agency that chooses to participate in a joint law enforcement task force, as defined, to submit a report every 6 months to the Department of Jttstiee. Justice, as specified The bill would require the Attorney General, within 14 months after the effective date of the bill, and twice a year thereafter, to report on the types and frequency of joint law enforcement task forces, and other information, as specified, and to post those reports on the Attorney General's Internet Web site. The bill would require the Board of Parole Hearings or the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, as applicable, to notify the Federal Bureau of Investigation of the scheduled release on parole or postrelease community supervision, or rerelease following a period of confinement pursuant to a parole revocation without a new commitment, of all persons confined to state prison serving a term for the conviction of a violent felony, and would authorize the sheriff to notify the Federal Bureau of Investigation of the scheduled release of a person confined to county jail for a misdemeanor offense who has a prior conviction for a violent felony, as specified.
:file
This bill would state findings and declarations of the Legislature relating to these provisions.
By imposing additional duties on public schools, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program.
96 April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 589 of 651 -3- SB54
The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state.
Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.
This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.
This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Vote: ½. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes.
State-mandated local program: yes.
The people of the State of California do enact as follows:
I SECTION 1. Chapter 17.25 (commencing with Section 7284) 2 is added to Division 7 of Title 1 of the Government Code, to read:
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
CHAPTER 17.25. COOPERATION WITH FEDERAL IMMIGRATION
AUTHORITIES
7284. This chapter shall be known, and may be cited, as the California Values Act.
7284.2. The Legislature finds and declares the following:
(a) Immigrants are valuable and essential members of the California community. Almost one in three Californians is foreign born and one in two children in California has at least one immigrant parent.
(b) A relationship of trust between California's immigrant community and state and local agencies is central to the pµblic safety of the people of California.
( c) This trust is threatened when state and local agencies are entangled with federal immigration enforcement, with the result that immigrant community members fear approaching police when they are victims of, and witnesses to, crimes, seeking basic health services, or attending school, to the detriment of public safety and the well-being of all Californians.
(d) Entangling state and local agencies with federal immigration enforcement programs diverts already limited resources and blurs the lines of accountability between local, state,' and federal governments.
96 April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 590 of 651 SB54 -4-
I (e) State and local part1c1pation in federal immigration 2 enforcement programs also raises constitutional concerns, including 3 the prospect that California residents could be detained in violation 4 of the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution, 5 targeted on the basis ofrace or ethnicity in :violation of the Equal 6 Protection Clause, or denied access to education based on 7 immigration status.
8 (f) This act seeks to ensure effective policing, to protect the 9 safety, well-being, and constitutional rights of the people of 10 California, and to direct the state's limited resources to matters of 11 greatest concern to state and local governments.
12 7284.4: For purposes of this chapter, the following terms have 13 thetfollowing meanings:
14 (a) "California law enforcement agency" means a state or local 15 law enforcement agency, including school police or security 16 departments.
17 (b) "Civil immigration warrant"· means any warrant for a 18 violation of federal civil immigration law, and includes civil 19 immigration warrants entered in the National Crime Information 20 Center database.
21 (c) "Federal immigration authority" means any officer, 22 employee, or person otherwise paid by or acting as an agent of 23 United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement or United 24 States Customs and Border Protection, or any division thereof, or 25 any other officer, employee, or pers-on otherwise paid by or acting 26 as an agent of the United States Department of Homeland Security 27 who is charged with immigration enforcement.
28 ( d) "Health facility" includes health facilities as defined in 29 Section 1250 of the Health and Safety Code, clinics as defined in 30 Sections 1200 and 1200.1 of the Health and Safety Code, and 31 substance abuse treatment facilities.
32 33
34 35
36 37
38 39
40 ( e) "Hold request," "notification request," "transfer request," and "local law enforcement agency" have the same meaQing as provided in Section 7283. Hold, notification, and transfer requests include requests issued by United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement oi United States Customs and Border Protection as well as any other federal immigration authorities.
(f) "Immigration enforcement" includes any and all efforts to investigate, enforce, or as·sist in the investigation or enforcement of any federal civil immigration law, and also includes any and all 96 April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 591 of 651 -5- S854
• 1 efforts to investigate, enforce, or assist in the investigation or 2 enforcement of any federal criminal immigration law that penalizes 3 a person's presence_ in, entry, or reentry to, or employment in, the 4 United States, including, but not limited to, violations of Section 5 1253, 1324c, 1325, or 1326 of Title 8 of the United States Code. 6 (g) "Joint law enforcement task force" means a California law 7 enforcement agency collaborating, engaging, or partnering with a 8 federal law enforcement agency in investigating, interrogating, 9 detaining, detecting, or arresting persons for violations of federal 10 or state crimes.
11 (h) "Judicial warrant" means a warrant based on probable cause 12 and issued by a federal judge or a federal magistrate judge that 13 authorizes federal immigration authorities to take into custody the 14 person who is the subject of the warrant.
15 (i) "Public schools" means all public elementary and secondary 16 schools under the jurisdiction oflocal governing boards or a charter 17 school board, the California State University, and the California 18 Community Colleges.
19 U) "School police and security departments" includes police 20 and security departments of the California State University, the 21 California Community Colleges, charter schools, county offices 22 of education, schools, and school districts.
23 7284.6. (a) California law enforcement agencies shall not do 24 any of the following:
25 (1) Use agency or department moneys, facilities, property, 26 equipment, or personnel to investigate, interrogate, detain, detect, 27 or arrest persons for immigration enforcement purposes, including, 28 but not limited to, any of the following:
29 (A) Inquiring into or collecting information about an individual's 30 immigration status, except as required to comply with Section 31 922(d)(5) of Title 18 of the United States Code.
32 (B) Detaining an individual on the basis of a hold request. 3 3 ( C) Responding to requests for notification or transfer requests. 34 (D) Providing or responding to requests for nonpublicly 35 available personal information about an individual, including, but 36 not limited to, information about the person's release date, home 3 7 address, or work address for immigration enforcement purposes. 38 (E) Making arrests based on civil immigration warrants. 96 April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 592 of 651 8B54 -6-
1 (F) Giving federal immigration authorities access to interview 2 individuals in agency or department custody for immigration 3 enforcement purposes.
4 (G) Assisting federal immigration authorities in the activities 5 described in Section 1357(a)(3) of Title 8 of the United States 6 Code.
7 (H) Performing the functions of an immigration officer, whether 8 pursuant to Section 1357(g) of Title 8 of the United States Code 9 or any other law, regulation, or policy, whether formal or informal. 10 (2) Make agency or department databases, including databases 11 maintained for the agency or department by private vendors, or 12 the information therein other than information regarding an 13 individual's citizenship or immigration status, available to anyone 14 or any entity for the purpose of immigration enforcement. Any 15 agreements in existence on the date that this chapter becomes 16 operative that conflict with the terms of this paragraph are 17 terminated on that date. A person or entity provided access to 18 agency or department databases shall certify in writing that the 19 database will not be used for the purposes prohibited by this 20 section.
21 (3) Place peace officers under the supervision of federal agencies 22 or employ peace officers deputized as special federal officers or 23 special federal deputies except to the extent those peace officers 24 remain subject to California law governing conduct of peace 25 officers and the policies ~fthe employing agency.
26 (4) Use federal immigration authorities as interpreters for law 27 enforcement matters relating to individuals in agency or department 28 custody.
29 (b) Nothing in this section shall prevent any California law 30 enforcement agency from doing any of the following:
31 (1) Responding to a request from federal immigration authorities 32 for information about a specific person's criminal history, including 33 previous criminal arrests, convictions, and similar criminal history 34 information accessed through the California Law Enforcement 35 Telecommunications System (CLETS), where otherwise permitted 36 by state law.
37 (2) Participating in a joint law enforcement task force, so long 38 as the purpose of the joint law enforcement task force is not 39 immigration enforcement, as defined in subdivision (f) of Section 40 7284.4.
96 April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 593 of 651 -7- SB54
1 ( c) If a California law enforcement agency chooses to participate . 2 in a joint law enforcement task force, it shall submit a report every 3 six months to the Department of Justice, as specified by the 4 Attorney General. Sensitiv1e in:funna:tion, as dete1mined by the 5 Atoome, General, The reporting agency or the Attorney General . 6 may determine a report, in whole or in part, is not a public record 7 for purposes of the California Public Records Act pursuant to 8 subdivision (t) of Section 6254 of the GCYtemment Code. to prevent 9 the disclosure of sensitive information, including, but not limited 10 to, an ongoing operation or a confidential informant. 11 ( d) The Attorney General, within 14 months after the effective 12 date of the act that added this section, and twice a year thereafter, 13 shall report on the types and frequency of joint law enforcement 14 task forces. The report shall include, for the reporting period, 15 assessments on compliance with paragraph (2) of subdivision (b ), 16 a list of all California law enforcement agencies that participate 17 in joint law enforcement task forces, a list of joint law enforcement 18 task forces operating in the state and their purposes, the number 19 of arrests made associated with joint law enforcement task forces 20 for the violation of federal or state crimes, and the number of arrests 21 made associated with joint law enforcement task forces for the_ 22 purpose of immigration enforcement by all task force participants, 23 . including federal law enforcement agencies. The Attorney General 24 shall post the reports required by this subdivision on the Attorney 25 General's Internet Web site.
26 ( e) Notwithstanding any other law, in no event shall a California 27 law enforcement agency transfer an individual to federal 28 immigration authorities for purposes of immigration enforcement 29 or detain an individual at the request of federal immigration 30 authorities for purposes of immigration enforcement absent a 31 judicial warrant. This subdivision does not limit the scope of 32 subdivision (a).
33 (t) This section does not prohibit or restrict any government 34 entity or official from sending to, or receiving from, federal 35 immigration authorities, information regarding the citizenship or 36 • immigration status, lawful or unlawful, of an individual pursuant 37 to Sections 1373 and 1644 of Title 8 of the United States Code. 38 7284.8. The Attorney General, within three months after the 39 effective date of the act that added this section, in consultation 40 with the appropriate stakeholders, shall publish model policies 96 April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 594 of 651 SB54 -8-
1 limiting assistance with immigration enforcement to the fullest 2 extent possible consistent with federal and state law at public 3 schools, health facilities operated by the state or a political 4 subdivision of the state, courthouses, Division of Labor Standards 5 Enforcement facilities, and shelters, and ensuring that they remain 6 safe and accessible to all California residents, regardless of' 7 immigration status. All public schools, health facilities operated 8 by the state or a political subdivision of the state, and courthouses 9 shall implement the model policy, or an equivalent policy. All 10 other organizations and entities that provide services related to 11 physical or mental health and wellness, education, or access to 12 justice, including the University of California, are encouraged to 13 adopt the model policy.
14 7284.10. The provisions of this act are severable. If any 15 provision of this act or its application is held invalid, that invalidity 16 shall not affect other provisions or applications that can be given 17 effect without the invalid provision or application. 18 SEC. 2. Section 11369 of the Health and Safety Code is 19 repealed.
20 SEC. 3. Section 3058.10 is added to the Penal Code, to read:
21 3058.10. (a) The Board of Parole Hearings, with respect to 22 inmates sentenced pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 1168, or 23 the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, with respect to 24 inmates sentenced pursuant to Section 1170, shall notify the Federal 25 Bureau of Investigation of the scheduled release on parole or 26 postrelease community supervision, or rerelease following a period 27 of confinement pursuant to a parole revocation without a new 28 commitment, of all persons confined to state prison serving a term 29 for the conviction of a violent felony listed in subdivision ( c) of 30 Section 667.5.
31 (b) The notification shall be made at least 60 days prior to the 32 scheduled release date or as soon as practicable if notification 33 cannot be provided at least 60 days prior to release. The only 34 nonpublicly available personal information that the notification 35 may include is the name of the person who is scheduled to be 36 released and the scheduled date of release.
37 SEC. 4. Section 3058.11 is added to the Penal Code, to read:
38 3058.11. (a) Whenever any person confined to county jail is 39 serving a term for the conviction of a misdemeanor offense and 40 has a prior conviction for a violent felony listed in subdivision ( c) 96 April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 595 of 651 -9- SB54
1 of Section 667.5 or has a prior felony conviction in another 2 jurisdiction for an offense that has all the elements of a violent 3 felony described in subdivision (c) of Section 667.5, the sheriff 4 may notify the Federal Bureau of Investigation of the scheduled 5 release of that person, provided that no local law or policy prohibits 6 the sharing of that information with either the Federal Bureau of 7 Investigation or federal immigration authorities.
8 (b) The notification may be made up to 60 days prior to the 9 scheduled release date. The only nonpublicly available personal 10 information that the notification may include is the name of the 11 person who is scheduled to be released and the scheduled date of 12 release.
13 SEC. 5. If the Commission on State Mandates determines that 14 this act contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement to 15 local agencies and school districts for those costs shall be made 16 pursuant to Part 7 (commencing with Section 17500) of Division 17 4 of Title 2 of the Government Code.
18 SEC. 6. This act is an urgency statute necessary for the 19 immediate preservation of the public peace, health, or safety within 20 the meaning of Article IV of the California Constitution and shall 21 go into immediate effect. The facts constituting the necessity are:
22 Because changes in federal immigration enforcement policies 23 require a statewide standard that clarifies the appropriate level of 24 cooperation between federal immigration enforcement agents and 25 state and local governments as soon as possible, it is necessary for 26 this measure to take effect immediately.
0 96
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 596 of 651
CORRESPONDENCE
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 597 of 651
Reese, Latasha
Subject:
Attachments:
FW: A Sanctuary Solution?
22242C65A65BDC 18ED3559A288FD384O. pep-letter-to-mayor-lee. pdf; A TT0000 1. txt -----Original Message-----
From: Erika Foy [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2017 7:40 AM
To: Madison, Steve; Gordo, Victor; Wilson, Andy; Kennedy, John; Hampton, Tyron; Sanchez, Phillip; Jomsky, Mark Subject: A Sanctuary Solution?
Good morning. I am assuming you have seen Diane Feinstein's letter to the Mayor of San Francisco? I know you are all· preparing for next Monday and I think this letter is extremely important and her suggestions should not be ignored, My hope is you make the move she suggests to prevent awful crimes against kids, families and communities. Thank you, Erika Foy
https:ljwww. fe inste in .senate .gov /public/ cache/ti les/2/ 4/24497 368-260a-4a24-a5f 1- 4b47c9c00e5c/22242C65A65 BDC18ED3559A2B8FD384D. pep-letter-to-mayor-lee. pdf • j
03/27/2017
Item 12
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 598 of 651
DIANNE FEINSTEIN
CALIFORNIA
The Honorable Ed Lee
Mayor
City Hall, Room 200
~ntteb Jjtatts Jjenatt
WASHINGTON, DC 20510-0504
http:h1elnsteln.senate.gov •
July 7, 2015
I Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place
San Francisco, CA 94102
Dear Mayor Lee:
SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTEUIGENCE • VICE CHAIRMAN
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
COMMITTEE ON RULES ANO ADMINISTRATION
I write today to express my deep concern about the release of convicted felon Juan Francisco Lopez-Sanchez, an action that led to last week's tragic death of Kathryn Steinle in San Francisco. I urge you to take immediate action to prevent such a tragedy from happening again by joining DHS's Priority Enforcement Program that facilitates the removal of dangerous criminal aliens. -
Mr. Sanchez has_ been convicted of IO crimes, four of which were drug felonies including heroin possession and narcotics manufacturing. He was also convicted three times for illegal reentry after deportation from the United States.
Rather than allowing ICE to remove Mr. Sanchez from the country, my understanding is that the San Francisco Sheriffs Department requested that Mr.
Sanchez be transferred from federal custody to Sheriffs Department's custody on a 20- year-old arrest warrant. Then, less than three weeks after that transfer, Mr. Sanchez was released from custody without regard to the Immigration and Customs Enforcement detainer request and without notifying ICE that he was being released.
The tragic death of Ms. Steinle could have been avoided if the Sheriffs Department had notified ICE prior to the release of Mr. Sanchez, which would have allowed ICE to remove him from the country.
A solution to this problem would be San Francisco's participation in ICE's "Priority Enforc.ement Program," known as PEP. Attached is a DHS memorandum "Secure Communities" that outlines the Priority Enforcement Program, created as part of President Obama's November 20, 2014, executive actions on immigration. 1 April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 599 of 651 As detailed in the enclosed ICE document, PEP "enables OHS to work with state and local law enforcement to take custody of ihdividuals who pose a danger to public safety before those individuals are released into our communities ... PEP focuses on convicted criminals and others who pose a danger to public safety." By agreeing to participate in the Priority Enforcement Program, San Francisco would provide notice to ICE before releasing aliens with long criminal records, such as Mr. Sanchez, upon request from ICE. The types of crimes that. would result in an alien being a top priority for removal under PEP are outlined in the attached OHS memorandum titled "Policies for the Apprehension, Detention and Removal of Undocumented Immigrants."
Recently, the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors adopted a resolution requesting that the L.A. County Sheriff"continue cooperating with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security in implementing the President's Priority Enforcement Program." I strongly encourage San Francisco to participate in this program.
We need to do all we can to ensure dangerous criminals are not released into our communities. _Thank you for your time and attention to this important matter. cc: The Honorable Jeh Johnson
Sincerely,
Dianne Feinstein
United States Senator
Secretary, Department of Homeland Security
Enclosed: ·
1. Summary of Convictions for Mr. Sanchez.
2. ICE Brochure on Priority Enforcement Program
3. "Secure Communities" Memorandum, November 20, 2014.
4. "Policies for the Apprehension, Detention and Removal of Undocumented Immigrants," Memorandum, November 20, 2014. ·
DF/erh
2 April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 600 of 651 Jomsky, Mark
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
City Clerk Mark Jomsky:
Dale <[email protected]>
Sunday, March 26, 2017 5:34 AM
Jomsky, Mark
Torhek, Terry; 'James Macpherson'; 'Skip Elbie Hickambottom'; [email protected]; 'Pablo Alvarado'; 'Ed Washatka'; 'Peter Dreier'
Correspondence re Agenda Items #8 and #12, City Council Meeting March 27, 2017 100%DisentanglementFromlCEBestlocalPolicingPolicy.pdf;
RedHerringlosingFederalFunds.pdf
The attached 2 articles by Lizbeth Mateo, Skip Hickambot~om, and me are submitted as additional correspondence for Agenda Items #8 and #12 (immigrant protection issues) for the City Council Meeting on March 23, 2017.
Dale Gronemeier
03/27/2017
Item 8 & 12
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 601 of 651
3122/2017 Pasadena Now» Guest Opinion I The strongest Local Policing Polley is Total Disentanglement from ICE I Pasadena California, Hoteis,CA Real Estate,R. ..
Guest Opinion I The Stro-ngest· Local
Policing Policy is Total Disentanglement
from ICE
Opinion Piece By Lizbeth Mateo, Skip Hickambottom, a·nd Dale Gronemeier Published : Tuesday, March 21, 2017 I 1:01 PM
Three progressive .Pasadena organizations
advocate an ordinance completely
uncoupling the Pasadena Police
Department (PPD) from the federal
Immigration and Cust_oms Enforcement
agency (ICE). The PPD's relationship to
ICE will be considered by the City Council
on March 27. Some critics of the proposal
to completely end all contacts between
Share 3
ICE and the PPD argue that it would undermine local law enforcement. The three organizations advocating 100% disentanglement from ICE - ND LON (the National Day Laborers Organizing Network), CLUE (Clergy and Laity United for Economic Justice), and POP! (Progressives Organizing for Progress) - argue the opposite and contend that a 100% non-cooperation policy would strengthen rather than weaken local policing.
There is a thoughtful way to determine whether policing in Pasadena would be more effective with or without some PPD contacts with ICE. In this Op-Ed, we first analyze the harm from PPD contacts with ICE. We then discuss the arguable benefits from contacts with ICE. We conclude by comparing the asserted needs for PPD contacts with ICE in comparison to the harms from those contacts.
The harm from PPD contacts with ICE - vulnerable residents non cooperation with local police when they believe the police are in bed with ICE The extended immigrant community's non-cooperation with local police is the inevitable consequence of contacts with ICE. Knowing that the PPD has relationships with ICE is lethal to the cooperation the PPD needs from the extended immigrant community in order to properly investigate and prosecute crime. The "extended immigrant community'' does not just mean the approximate 11 million http:/lwww.pasadenanOw.com/malrvguest-oplnioo-the-strongest-local-policing-pdicy-tolal-disentanglement-from-ice/#.WNLQZ2grKUk 1/6 April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 602 of 651
3/'Z2/2017 Pasadena Now » Guest Opinion I The Strongest Local Policing Policy is Total Disentanglement from ICE I Pasadena California, Hotels.CA Real Estate,R ... undocumented immigrants in the U.S. It also means many millions more residents who are documented non-citizen immigrants whose green cards, visa cards, or other documentation giving them legal status can be revoked. But the extended immigrant community does not end there; it J includes many more millions of citizens whose family members, spouses, friends, employers, and neighbors may be reluctant to cooperate with local police for fear that their contacts will expose noncitizen immigrants to deportation. For Pasadena, the extended immigrant community includes the majority of its Northwest Pasadena Latino community, but it extends to some extent throughout the entirety of Pasadena.
The empirical data on non-cooperation with local police because of perceived relationship between them and ICE presents a stark picture. T,heodore "!~secure Communities: Latino Perceptions of Police Involvement in Immigration Enforcement" is a 2013 University of Illinois study that extensively surveyed LA County and 3 other counties when they become aware of police involvement in immigration enforcement. Among its conclusions were the following:
70% of undocumented immigrants were less likely to contact the police if they are victims of a crime; 44% of Latinos were less likely to contact police if they were victims of a crim~ because they fear that police officers will .use this interaction as an opportunity to inquire into the immigration status of them or the persons they know; . .
45% of Latinos _were less likely to cooperate with crime investigations or report crime for the same reason.
LAPD Police Chief Charlie Beck was quoted extensively about this phenomenon of non-cooper~tion in Steve Lopez' January 29 LA Times article "Police Chief Beck won't budge on immigration." Chief Beck indicated that the problem is bigger than refusal to step up as witnesses. "A lot of people think, well, he's talking about witnesses to crime, which I am. But I'm also talking about victims of crimes." Chief Beck explained: "When you create a shadow population that fears any interaction with the law, then you create a-whole class of victims, because they become prey for human predators who extort them or abuse them because they know they won't contact the police." (We don't intend to gloss over the disparity between Chief Beck's words and what many of his officers do, but that disparity warrants a whole other article.)
Chief Beck is not alone. The threat to policing from requiring local police to enforce federal immigration law is well-recognized by many progressive police chiefs. The professional organization of police chiefs, the International Associa~ion of Chiefs of Police, issued a policy statement on December 1, 2004, opposing any compulsory cooperation with ICE, saying "Many leaders in the law enforcement community have serious concerns about the chilling effect any measure of this nature http:Jlwww.pasadenanow.com/main/guest-opinlon-lhe-strongest-local-policing-policy-total-disentanglement-from-ice/#.WNLOZ2grKUk 2/6 April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 603 of 651
3122/2017 Pasadena Now» Guest Opinion I The Strongest Local Policing Policy is Total Disentanglement from ICE I Pasadena California, Hotels.CA Real Estate,R. •• would have on legal and illegal aliens reporting criminal activity or assisting police in criminal investigations. This lack of cooperation could diminish the ability of law enforcement agencies to police effectively their.communities and protect the public they serve." (The IACP recognized that there are police chiefs who disagree with this view).
In a· January 30 LA Times article "Police wary of new duty", LAPD Detective Brent Hopkins illustrated the non-cooperation problem he.faces. He was trying to interview witnesses to an incident in which a motorist knocked down a construction worker. He introduced himself to a group of Latino workers.
They walked away, with one of them saying "Trump is coming." Hopkins was ·quoted as saying "It is my job to investigate crimes. And if I can't do that, I can't get justice for people because all of a sudden, I'm losing my witnesses or my victims because they're afraid that talking to me is going to lead to them getting deported."
While it may seem counter-intuitive, there is ample evidence that local policing is harmed by knowledge that local police have contacts with ICE. Any exceptions for the PPD to have contacts with ICE thus carry a heavy burden to demonstrate that the benefit of such contacts outweigh the damage to cooperation with local police that inevitably results from knowledge of those contacts.
The "really bad guy" exception - an exception without a demonstrable rieed and mission creep To his credit, Pasadena PD Chief Phillip Sanchez - like LAPD Chief Beck and Detective Hopkins - recognizes that his police have trouble getting cooperation from many Northwest residents for a • " variety of reasons, and fear that his police are cooperating with ICE is one of them. To his further credit, Chief Sanchez' police have drastically curtailed contacts with ICE since the last PPD-ICE joint operation 1 ½ years ago. In a December 2016, Pasadena Progressive Discussion Group forum Chief Sanchez_ assured the forum that it was not Pasadena PD policy to work with ICE. However, he referred to working with ICE on certain cases concerning dangerous bad guys and said "Surely, no one would disagree with that."
We do ·disagree with Chief Sanchez because-there is no demonstrable need for ICE/PPD cooperation in going after "really bad guys." It is important to understand that "bad guy" does not mean what many people might assume. Some of those deemed "bad guys" are people who have served their time and have changed their lives. They are members of our communities, churches, and families. This "bad:guy'' exception has led, ev~n under the previous administration, to the deportations of hundreds of thousands of people with minor infractions, including traffic violations, or who had no criminal record. People who commit serious crimes should be held accountable, and the US criminal system exists to ensure that they do. But the actions of a few should not be used to scapegoat or instill fear in an entire community.
http:/twww.pasadenanow.com/mairvguest-opinion-the-strongest-local-policing-policy-total-disentanglement-from-ice/#.WNLQZ2grKUk 316 April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 604 of 651
3/'l212017 Pasadena Now » Guest Opinion I The strongest Local Policing Poli.cy Is Total Disentanglement from ICE I Pasadena California, Holels,CA Real Estate,R. ..
But even if a "really bad guy" is undocumented, ICE does not need the Pasadena PD to detain and deport him. If the PPD has evidence that a "really bad guy" has committed a crime, the PPD has no need to involve ICE to prosecute him. Even though the PPD has apparently believed it had a continuing contractual relationship with ICE (through a series of MO Us that have not been signed by the required higher City authorities), it has:chosen not to have any contacts with ICE for 1 ½ years.
When the benefit of the PPD voluntarily working with ICE is so infrequent that there have been no ICE-PPD contacts for 1 ½ years, such infrequency indicates that the need for such contacts is insubstantial. But even with such insubstantial need for contacts, the damage to cooperation with lo~l policing has been substantial from (1) the knowledge that there was a joint ICE-PPD operation 1 ½ years ago, (2) the knowledge that the PPD voluntarily entered into an MOU with ICE a week after Trump was elected that purported to obligate the PPD to dedicate officers to ICE investigations and joint operations "to the maximum extent feasible, and (3) the knowledge that Chief Sanchez was . . acting ultra vires because he ignored the r~quirement to get the City Manager's signature? The balan~e between insubstantial need and_ substantial damages clearly weighs against the "really bad guy" exception.
In addition, there is the problem of mission creep. Reports on ICE sweeps after supposedly "really bad guys" repeatedly refer to "collateral" detainees - i.e.! undocumented immigrants who are not "really bad guys" who get swept up in such ICE sweeps. Last year, ICE detained Xochitl Hernadez while doing a ride along with LAPD. ICE made unsubstantiated claims, based solely on racially biased speculations and where she-lived, that Xochitl had gang affiliations. However, LAPD later confirmed Xochitl had no gang-related conviction or charges, and she was released after several months. Just last month, ICE • came knocking on the door of the Ortiz family, claiming to be the "police" looking for a suspect. The man ICE claimed to be looking for did not live in the Ortiz's house, but that did not stop ICE from taking Carlos Ortiz into custody. Carlos is a loving father and grandfather, a long time resident of Pasadena, and has no criminal convictions. Pasadena's Mayor, City Council Members, City Manager and Police Chief need to think through" whether they want to have to justify the next ICE sweep in town when the stories of the "collateral" damage ofICE'hauling away hard-working parents, neighbors, friends, and workers flood into City Council meetings.
The "standby" exception - another exception. without a demonstrable need Another exception we've heard is that PPD officers should be on-site for ICE raids so that ICE agents would not have to call the police in the event there is trouble. The most recent permutation of this . exception that we heard from a City Council Member was that PPD officers should be close in the event of trouble but far enough a'"':'ay that they wouldn't be seen - implicitly recognizing the harm from any public PPD-ICE interaction but wanting to have it both ways. t'd!p:/lwww.pasadenanow.com/mairvguest-opirion-the-strongest-local-policing-policy-total-di~entanglemeot-from-ice/#.WN LQZ2grKUk April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 605 of 651
3122/2017 Pasadena Now» Guest Opinion I The Strongest Local Policing Policy is Total Dlsentanglemert from ICE I Pasadena California, Hotels.CA Real Estate,R. ..
The idea that ICE agents are not big boys who can take care of themselves would be laughable if the· stakes were not so high in this matter. The simple answer to the "standby" exception is that ICE can take care of itself; if they have to haye an extra ICE agent with a cell phone to call the PPD, let Trump's ICE bear that cost, not the taxpayers of Pasadena.
The "Customs" exception - ICE is ICE, and another exception without a demonstrable need A third exception argued against a 100% ban on voluntary contacts with ICE is that ICE's customs activities should be exempted: ICE's jurisdiction is, of course, immigration and customs enforcement.
This exemption recognizes that the problem with ICE arises from its immigration enforcement and seeks to preserve contacts for its customs enforc~ment. This exemption fails to recognize the damage from any ICE contacts, and its need is even more insubstantial than any need to cooperate with ICE's immigration enforcement.
ICE is ICE to the public - whether it is enforcing the immigration laws or the customs laws. The extended immigrant community is not going to differentiate between PPD contacts with ICE for . immigration purposes vs.· contacts with ICE for customs purposes. So the damage of non-cooperation with local law· enforcement from ICE contacts will be substantially the same irrespective of what section of ICE is involved.
The need for contacts with ICE for customs enforcement appears to be even more insubstantial that any arguable need for immigration enforcement. Pasadena is not Long Beach nor San Pedro with a lot of customs issues at its ports. The most recent PPD-ICE cooperation was apparently for immigration enforcement. We doubt there have been any substantial customs enforcement contacts by the PPD with ICE, but, if there are, the burden of demonstrating such a need is on the proponents to ~uch an exemption. We doubt.that there have been any such contacts for a long time- reflecting that the infrequency of customs enforcement indicates an insubstantial need.
The loss of federal funds red herring
Some argue that there is a need to col)tinue contacts with ICE because failure to do so will cause Pasadena to lose federal funds. Rebutting that red herring warranted the full op-ed on the subject by us that Pasadena Now just published .. It demonstrates that the law generally does not require municipalities to enforce federal immigration law a~d that Trump's fantasy that he can cut-off federal funds for state and local governments who choose not to participate in immigration enforcement is clearly fantasy. Somewhere between very little and none of Pasadena's federal funds could be at risk by passing an ordinance prohibiting ICE contacts to the maximum extent permitted by law. hllp://www.pasaclenanOW.com/mairvguest•opinion-the-strongest-local•policing.policy-lotal-diserdanglement-from-ice/#.WNLQZ2grKUk 516 April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 606 of 651
3/22/2017 Pasadena Now » Guest Opinion I The Strongest Local Policing _Policy Is Total Disentanglement from ICE I Pasadena California, Hotels,CA Real Estate,R. ..
Balancing the non-cooperation downside from PPD-ICE contact and the absence of any meaningful benefit indicates that an ordinance barring all PPD-ICE contacts would strengthen local policing ND LON, CLUE, and POP! have submitted to the Pasadena City Council a proposed "Pasadena Police Department Immigration Status and Bias-Free Policing Policy" that seeks to protect Pasadena's most vt1lnerable residents - its undocumented and documented immigrants. Prohibiting PPD contacts with ICE to the maximum extent permitted by law is a cornel'.stone of that proposed immigrant-protection policy. It is warranted because the exceptions that have been articulated to a 100% ban on voluntary cooperation with ICE have insubstantial benefits. It is also the strongest policing policy for the Pasadena PD because it is the policy that most strongly counters non-cooperation with local policing by the extended immigrant community.
Lizbeth Mateo is an organizer for POP!; Skip Hickambottom and Dale Gronemeier are local civil rights attorneys .• Portions of this article have previously been published in the LA Progressive that can be accessed at https: //www.laprogressive.com/victor-gordo/:
Thanks to LA Progressive for permission to re-use in this article some verbatim language that has been previously published in that journal.
http://www.pasadenanow.com/mai rvguest-oplnion-the-strongest-local-policing-policy-total-disentanglement-from-ice/#.WN LOZ2grKUk 616 April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 607 of 651
3/21/2017 Pasadena Now » Guest Opinion I Pasadena Losing Federal Funds? A Red Herring on Pasadena Becoming a Sanctuary City I Pasadena California, Hotel ...
Guest Opinion I Pasadena Losing
Federal Funds? A Red Herring on
Pasadena Becoining a Sanctuary City
Opinion piece by LIZBETH MATEO, SKIP HIG~BOTIOM and DALE L. 0-RONEMEIER Publ~hed : Thursday, March 16, 2017 I 9:44 AM
. Becoming a sanctuary city and endirig the
Pasadena Police Department's
relationship to Immigration and Customs
Enforcement (ICE) will be considered by
the Pasadena City Council on March 27. •
At the City Council meeting, three
progressive Pasadena organizations -
NDLON (the National Day Laborers
Organizing Network), CLUE (Clergy and
Share 12
Laity United for Economic Justice), and POP! (Progressives Organizing for Progress) - will advocate a Pasadena polidng policy that would take the City compl_etely out of cooperating with the federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency ("ICE") and other measures that would make Pasadena truly a sanctuary City.
Some critics of the proposal to completely end all contacts between ICE and the Pasadena PD contend that it would risk the City's continuing to receive federal funds. With the City already facing a structural budget deficit and its budget including about $35 million in federal funds, there can be no dispute that it would be a significant blow to Pasadena if the Trump administration could retaliate t~ Pasadena becoming a true sanctuary city by cutting off all federal funds.
But even more clearly than the wrecking of Trump's Muslim travel bans by the law, the Trump administration attempt to cut off all federal funding would be derailed by current law. The actual risk of a retaliatory cut-off of federal funds is somewhere between non-existent to 1% of the $35 million Pasadena receives in federal funds. The possibility qf a $35 million cut-off of federal funds is overblown-fear-mongering. • The law - Immigration enforcement is a federal responsibility http://www.pasadenanow.com/mairvguest-opinion-pasadena-losing-federal-furds-a-red-herring-Oll-pasaclena-becoming-a-sanctuary-city/#.WNF _8GgrKUk 1/5 April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 608 of 651
3.121/2017 Pasadena Na.v » Guest Opinion I Pasadena Losing Federal FU'lds? A Red Herring on Pasadena Becoming a Sanctuary City I Pasadena California, Hotel ....
Sanctuary policies are consistent with federal law. In 1996, Congress enacted 8 U.S. § 1373(a) , which prohibits local and state governments and agencies from enacting laws or policies that limit communication with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) about information r~garding the "immigration citizenship status" of individuals. However, § 1373(a) does not impose an affirmative obligation on local or state goverµments to collect information regarding the immigration status of certain individuals, nor does it require these agencies to take any steps upon obtaining such information. In fact, doing so would violate the U.S. Constitution.
Requiring local or state·governments to enforce federal immigration law would violate the Tenth .Amendment of the United States Constitution. The Tenth Amendment prohibits federal governm~nt from coercing state and local governments to use their resources to enforce federal laws or regulations. Deportation is governed by federal immigration law and handled by the federal government. A number of cases have established that the federal government cannot compel cities to enforce federal laws. In Printz v. United States, in an opinion writt~n by Justice Scalia, the U.S.
Supreme Court held that local law enforcement officials did not have to carry out han~gun background-checks on behalf of the federal government. Any attempts by the Trump administration to force local governments to carry out deportations on behalf of ICE would amount to "commandeering", which is a violation of the Tenth Amendment and, ironically, it would violate the principles of federalism_ that conservatives have used to advocate for more states' rights.
Moreover, policies that prevent police officers from inquiring about the immigration status of suspects or arrestees have been upheld by the Courts. In 2009; in Sturgeon v. Bretton, a California Court of Appeal dismissed a challenge to LAPD's Special Order 40 when it found no conflict between federal immigration laws and LAPD's policy directing its officers to not initiate police action with the sole objective of discovering a person's immigration status.
In sum, sanctuary policies are an exercise of basic state and local powers, and absent a Court order, PPD is under no obligation to inquire about the immigration status of those they suspect to be undocumented, to hold them for ICE, or to share this information with ICE.
The law - Federal fund cut-offs require a close connection between their purpose and the City's conduct
Can the Federal Government withhol~ funding from Sanctuary Citi~? Yes, but only to a limited extent. Last month, the Trump administration issued an executive order directi?g the identification of federal money it might try to withhold to punish sanctuary cities. . .However, the President's power to withhold federal funds from the states is severely limited without ~Jfwww.pasadenanow.com/mairvguest-opirion-pasadeoa-losing-federal-finls-a:-red-herring-on-pasadena-becoming-a-sanctuary-city/#.WNF _8GgrKUk 215 April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 609 of 651
3121/2017 Pasadena Noo » Guest Opinion I Pasadena Losing Federal Funds? A Red Herring on Pasadena Becoming a Sanctuary City I Pasadena California, Hotel ... the help of Congress. It is Congress, not the President, who has the ultimate power under the U.S.
Constitution's Spending Clause to allocate money to states or private entities and require them, as a condition to receiving those funds, to engage _in certain activity or to refrain from certain activity.
However, even that power has limitations.
Ironically, the conseryative majority of the Supreme Court that struck down part of Obamacare established one of the strong precedents that would severely limit or prohibit the ability of the Trump administration to retaliate against sanctuary cities. In the 2012 NFIB v. Sebelius decision striking • down part of Obamacare, the Supreme Court said that Congress couldn't withhold all of a state's ·Medicaid funding if the state didn't vote to expand its Medicaid program because doing so would '
amount ~o a "gun to the head" of states. The Supreme Court thus made it clear that Congress cannot exert a power akin to undue influence. It limited the federal government's ability to coerce states to adopt certain policies by threatening a loss o_f funding.
For the Trump administration to avoid being hauled into court once again and have its actions declared unconstitutional, it can only withhold funds if the money is directly tied to the behavior to which it objects. Because sanctuary cities by definition have no programs enforcing federal immigration law, it is problematic whether any federal funds could be cut off. At best, the Trump administration might be able to withhold funding from sanctuary cities for policing grants because of a cities' failure to follow policing practices related to specific immigration enforcement but not unrelated grants the City already receives for things like Section 8 Housing subsidies, transportation, public health, workforce development, nutrition, public arts, and fire department grants. Moreover, Trump's executive order has an exemption protecting grants deemed necessary for law enforcement purposes, so event c~tting off any law enforcement grants is problematic.
Thus, the Trump administration cannot punish sanctuary cities by cutting off unrelated funds like housing and transportation, and probably can't even cut off funding to sanctuary city police departments.
Pasadena's federal funds - 0%-1% could arguably be related to immigration enforcement
Pasadena could arguably lose between nothing and 1% of the money granted by the Federal government. In 2016, Pasadena received about $35 million in federal grants, with the bulk going to housing and transportation. Only $379,000 went to the police department. As the graph, the rest of those federal grants were for things such as Section 8 Housing subsidies ($17.8 million), Transportation ($7.8 million), public health ($3.5 million), workforce development ($3 million), nutrition ($1.7 million), public arts ($91,000), and the fire department ($379,000). The Trump. tdtp-Jlwww.pasadenanow.com/mairvguest-opinion-pasadena-losing-federal-ftn:ls-a.red-herring-on-pasadena-becomlng-a.sarw;ruary-city/#.WNF _BGgrKUk 3/5 April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 610 of 651
3'21/2017 Pasadena Ncm » Guest Opinion I Pasadena Losing Federal Funds? A Red Herring on Pasadena Becoming a Sanctuary City I Pasadena Californa, Hotel ... administration cannot strip Pasadena of
federal funds allocated to things like
public health and workforce
development, which are completely
unrelated to policing and immigration
enforcement. Thus, if the Trump
administration had been able to "withhold
any federal funding as punishment for
declaring Pasadena a sanctuary city based
on 2016 figures, at rriost it could have
withheld the 1% alle.cated to the police
department. But the bulk of the federal
money going to the Pasadena PD in 2016
was the one-time grant of $250,000 for
body-camera purchase and
Fl,•<UM
Policct'iAM
implementation. That money has already been spent, and the City is awa~ting the $250,000 reimbursement. Since the body-camera money was a one-time grant, the next budget for the PD presumably will represent only about 3/1oths of 1% of the City's federal funds. And even those less substantial police funds are unlikely to be cut-off in retaliation for Pasadena becoming a sanctuary city.
Pasadena as a Sanctuary City
Many progressive cities have declared themselves "sanctuary cities." California is one of four states considering declaring itself a "sanctuary state", even tough it already places some limits on the use of state resources to enforce federal immigration law. The term "sanctuary city" has no precise legal meaning, but it is generally used to refer to localities that limit or prohibit the use of funds or resources to enforce federal immigration laws. Soi:ne of these localities have enacted policies that prohibit or limit their police or employees from turning over residents or information on them to the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement ("ICE"). The most recent locality in California to take this step is Santa Ana, the second largest city in Orange County. Other cities are considering moving"in that direction.
Pasadena is not yet a sanctuary city. Pasadena adopted a resolution in October 2013, supporting the principle that '1ocal governments should not be mandated to enforce federal immigration laws, particularly when resources necessary to enforce lo~l laws are already stretched." While Police Chief . .
Sanchez reports that Pasadena has not carried out a coordinated operation with ICE since 2015, http://www.pasadeoanow.com/mairvguest-opinioo-pasadena-losing-federal·Mds-a-r~herring-oo-pasadena-becomlng-a-sanctuary-dty/#.WNF _8GgrKUk April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 611 of 651
3/21/2017 Pasadena Now» Guest Opinion I Pasadena Losing Federal Funds? A Red Herring on Pasadena Becoming a Sanctuary City I Pasadena Califorria, Hotel ...
Pasadena does not prohibit police contacts with ICE. The Pasadena PD entered into an agreement with ICE shortly after Trump's election that, if enforceable, would obligate it to dedicate its officers to support any ICE investigation or joint operation. To his credit, City Manager Steve Mermell declined to sign the ICE agreement. The sanctuary city policing poiicy proposed by ND LON, CLUE, and POP! would make it clear that Pasadena is not going to be in bed with ICE. The Pasadena City Council • formally declaring that Pasadena is a sanctuary city would be an important symbolic statement, and a no:-contacts-with-ICE policing policy would be a meaningful policy supporting Pasadena meaningfully being a sanctuary city.
Lizbeth Mateo is a recent law school graduate who is an organizer for POP! Skip Hickambottom and Dale Gronemeier are local civil rights attorneys.
hltp:/lwww.pasaclenanow.com/mai rvguest-opi ni on-pasadena-losing-federal-funds-a:-red-herring-on-pasadena-becoming-a-sanctuary-cityJ#..WN F _8GgrKU k 5/5 April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 612 of 651
Jomsky, Mark
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
March 24, 2017
Erica Clark <[email protected]>
Saturday, March 25, 2017 5:11 PM
Jomsky, Mark
Anita Fromholz
Request from Pasadena: City of Learning community-wide consortium for consideration by City Council at 3.27.17 meeting, re agenda item on immigration and travel ban matters PCoL member list by organization .docx
TO: The Hon. Terry Tomek, Mayor, City of Pasadena
Members, Pasadena City Council
FROM: The Pasadena: City of Learning community-wide consortium RE: Statement of opposition to the March 17, 2017 revised Presidential Executive Order on immigration
The Pasadena: City of Learning community-wide consortium respectfully urges the City of Pasadena, through the City Council, to publicly oppose the March 17, 2017 revised Presidential Executive Order, "Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry Into the United States." As described below, the Order would have numerous deleterious effects on the civic, cultural, and educational life of the City.
Pasadena: City of Learning (PCoL) represents educational, civic, and cultural institutions throughout the community (please see attached list). For nearly 15 years, PCoL has engaged with topics of key relevance to the city-such as early education, violence prevention, job creation, and public health issues, among many others. In addition to promoting greater awareness of the . issues at hand, these discussions have fostered myriad collaborations and partnerships between C.ity of Leaming participants: networking at its most constructive. Today, PCoL has grown to include representatives of many established organizations throughout the city - our universities and colleges, healthcare organizations, media outlets, scientific institutions, libraries, foundations, senior centers, arts organizations, and more. Former Mayor Bill Bogaard has publicly endorsed the consortium as a reflection of one of Pasadena's key values: lifelong learning in every sphere.
On March 13, 2017, a special meeting of PCoL was convened to discuss the initial Executive Order of March 6, 2017 and its effects in the City of Pasadena. Presentations by representatives of Congresswoman Judy Chu's office, the City of Pasadena, Pasadena City College, and Fuller Theological Seminary were followed by discussion among the more than 40 attendees. Throughout, this group of Pasadena's educational, cultural, and civic leadership expressed deep concerns about the implications of this order on our community. Following are just four of the results that the Executive Order will produce:
03/27/2017
Item 12
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 613 of 651
• A decline in international applications of students and faculty to the City's many educational institutions, and increased difficulty in retaining current international students and faculty - limiting the diversity for which these institutions have long strived. The Administration's actions have already had an impact on our country's educational diversity - a recent survey of 250 college_s and universities revealed that 39% of these institutions have reported a drop in applications from international students. A decline in international students will also result in a . significant reduction in tuition revenues, impacting institutional budgets overall. • A foreseeable threat to healthcare services in Pasadena, many of which rely on a significant proportion of foreign-born doctors and staff at all levels. A decrease in medical personnel due to the.Executive Order will result in a decline in the standards for which our healthcare organizations are known. Fewer patients will be able to be served-potentially placing many of our community's citizens in peril.
• A threat to the city's leadership in the sciences and technology. Already there has been a chilling effect on scientists' and scholars' willingness and ability to travel here or abroad for conferences and research.
• A direct impact on tourism to Pasadena that could negatively affect the City's hotels, restaurants, and renowned cultural destinations.
Throughout its history, Pasadena has been a beacon for talented people from around the world, embracing new and diverse perspectives, and new approaches to problems of all kinds as the surest means to create knowledge and improve society. By welcoming immigrants who have fostered progress in science, business, the arts, technology, and more, those who live and/or work in Pasadena have made inestimable contributions to this country, and to the American ideal.
The Executive Order could have long-lasting chilling and destructive effects on all of these achievements, and would impact Pasadena's economic, civic, cultural, and educational stature at all levels.
For all of these reasons, the members of Pasadena: City of Learning voice their opposition to the Executive Order of March 17, 2017. We appeal to the Pasadena City Council to publicly state its opposition as well, and if necessary, encourage the Council to consult the many existing resources that can provide specific, constructive services to those who may be most directly affected by the Order.
Thank you.
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 614 of 651
Pasadena: City of Learning
Member Organizations 2017 •
A Noise Within
American Red Cross
Armory Center for the Arts
Art Center Colleae of Desian
California Alliance for Arts Education
. Caltech
Carneqie Observatories
Collaborate PASadena
City of Pasadena
Council for the Youna Child
Fuller Theological Seminary
Huntington Hospital
Huntington Library & Gardens
JPL
Kidspace Museum
Norton Simon Museum.
Pacific Oaks Colleae
Pasadena Area Liberal Arts Center
Pasadena Chamber of Commerce
Pasadena City Colleae
Pasadena Educational Foundation
Pasadena Human Services Department
Pasadena Museum of History
Pasadena Public Health Department
Pasadena Public Library
Pasadena Senior Center
Pasadena Symphony and POPS
Pasadena Unified School District
Planned Parenthood Pasadena & SGV
Polytechnic School
SCPR- KPCC
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 615 of 651
Jomsky, Mark
Subject: Sanctuary City
From: John R Porter Jr. [mai1to:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, March 27, 2017 1:45 PM
To: Morales, Margo
Subject: Re: Sanctuary City
Hi Margo, ,,
Thank you, again, for your follow-through regarding whether or not Pasadena should become a Sanctuary City. Our thoughts on this have evolved, especially after listening to the Mayor of Los Angeles on KPCC several days ago.
Emotionally, we feel like reacting impulsively and advocating that Pasadena go ahead and become a 'Sanctuary City' due to what's happening in Washington DC and the White House. However, we think it's wiser to take a more thoughtful, strategic approach e.g., by following the LA City model of having very specific legal processes and protocols in place by all of city departments to protect the individual civil and due process rights of all citizens, including undocumented immigrants.
According to a recent Rewire article, "The devil is in the details. City sanctuary resolutions are just simple statements. What cities need is a local, law-binding [resolution] with accountability measures in place. Such measures, the article said, should hold police responsible if they go against "sanctuary city" policies and help to shield city agencies hoping to better protect vulnerable, undocumented community members." With this in mind, we encourage the City Council to review the policies and procedures of both LA City and New York City (which is said to be the most proactive of all the cities, while still obeying Federal law) as benchmarking sites and then get into a discussion of what's right for Pasadena.
Thank you!
John Porter and Cynthia Betances
1207 N Mar Vista Ave Pasadena, CA
03/27/2017
Item 12
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 616 of 651
Jomsky, Mark
Subject: FW: Please Do not support Pasadena becoming a Sanctuary City From: Susann Perry
Sent: Monday, March 27, 2017 1:33 PM
To: Stone, Rhonda
Subject: Please Do not support Pasadena becoming a Sanctuary City I'm a Pasadena Voter and Resident. I do not support Sanctuary Cities.
Best Regards,
Susann Perry
mailing address:
PO Box 50628, Pasadena, CA 91115
03/27/2017
Item 12
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 617 of 651
. Freedom Cities Action Guide . .
ACLU Resistance Training Action Guide
Intro
What is the ACLU's "Freedom Cities" campaign
What are the main components of the ACLU's plan to win on immigration ACLU's 9 "Model" State and Local Law Enforcement Policies and Rules.
How People Power activists can help the ACLU make their community a "Freedom City..'.'..
At your March 11 action event
At your next organizing meeting
Intro
When President Trump first introduced his unconstitutional Muslim ban, the ACLU took him to court and won. He has now introduced a new version of the ban. Together we will beat him again. We will beat him in the courts and in the court of public opinion. We will beat him on the Muslim ban, and on countless other aspects of his unconstitutional and un-American agenda.
In November 1919, when thousands of people were -- unconstitutionally and without warrant -- rounded up and deported by the U.S. Attorney General, he used the cover of irrational fear to ignore our Constitution and take away the basic freedoms afforded to all people, much like President Trump does today.
That same year, a small group of Americans came together to take a stand and say with one voice "No." These courageous activists founded the ACLU.
For nearly 100 years, the ACLU has worked in our courts and legislatures to defend and preserve the rights and liberties guaranteed by the Constitution and laws of the United States. Now, in response to the unprecedented threat of President Trump's attack on our basic freedoms, the ACLU is recruiting grassroots activists like you to organize actions in your community in support of our civil liberties. "People have known us for, 'See you in court,"' ACLU political director Faiz Shakir says. "I hope now they'll also know us for, 'See you in the streets."'
Trump's Muslim ban may be leading the news, but the Trump administration agenda is much more far reaching than banning refugees and those traveling here from Muslim nations. Here within our borders, immigrants -- and even American citizens who are mistaken for immigrants -- are under attack by federal authorities carrying out the Trump agenda.
This People Power Action guide will outline some of the major threats that members of our communities are facing as a result of the Trump agenda, and a way you can be part of the solution by engaging in grassroots action in support of a massive new ACLU initiative called "Freedom Cities." 03/27/2017 Item 12
D1stnbuted by Jennipha Nielson
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 618 of 651
What is the ACLU's Freedom Cities campaign
President Trump is seeking to recruit, and where that fails, compel local law enforcement agencies to help his administration pursue its mass deportation agenda.
In response to this effort and many other Trump administration plans that fly in the face of our Constitution and norms, the ACLU is launching an ambitious campaign called "Freedom Cities." Immigration will be the first battle we wage, but many others are coming. On immigration, just like activists organized locally to demand the release of people detained at our airports by federal authorities, People Power activists we will organize in our communities to ensure that our local law enforcement officials defend - not threaten - our friends, families, and neighbors. People Power will be a powerful grassroots force supporting the ACLU's efforts to propose, support, and win local laws that make it more difficult for President Trump to pursue his dangerous agenda. And make no mistake about it, America's cities, counties and towns are places we can and will win.
As part of this local grassroots strategy, the ACLU has identified areas in which municipal opposition to, or lack of cooperation with, the Trump administration will impede objectionable policies the president is pursuing.
ACLU's "Freedom Cities" plan brings local grassroots activists together and provides a blueprint for local-level campaigns -- in cities and counties -- to defend our communities and block the worst abuses of the Trump administration. These are campaigns that will generate victories in the short term even as we work towards comprehensive protections nationwide in the long term.
"Freedom Cities" is a hugely ambitious campaign. Some of the policies that we will demand may sound legally complex but that's because the ACLU has come up with a plan to fight the Trump administration lawfully and systematically, not just by defending each individual as they are detained, harassed, or deported.
We're counting on grassroots volunteers like you to help local elected officials to adopt the ACLU's model state and local law enforcement policies and rules that will effectively counter or block cooperation with Trump's antiimmigrant and anti-refugee agenda.
What are the main components of the ACLU's plan to win on immigration? The ACLU has challenged the President's travel ban on refugees and Muslims in the courts and has been deeply critical of other aspects of his immigration agenda, especially the Trump administration's heavy-handed immigration enforcement in America's towns and cities.
National and state ACLU staff attorneys and lobbyists are already fighting back against the Trump administration's attempts to compel or cajole local jurisdictions into directly supporting new federal immigration directives that endanger Muslims, immigrants, refugees and other members of our communities who might be perceived to be in one of those categories.
Now here is where you come in. In addition to litigation and fights on Capitol Hill, the ACLU has expanded its efforts to roll back the Trump administration's worst abuses by enlisting local grassroots activists like you. Local activists are needed to organize in support of the ACLU's efforts to convince local officials to resist complying with the Trump administration agenda.
In addition to public demonstrations of support like protesting, we need to go on offense in a way that is strategic and has lasting effect. To achieve this, the ACLU has outlined nine "model" state and local law enforcement policies and rules which -- if adopted -- in "Freedom Cities" throughout the nation, will protect our families and our neighbors' families from some of the worst abuses of the Trump administration.
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 619 of 651
This i-s a strategy that will generate short-term wins even as we embark on the longer term objective of nationwide protection for our communities. The ACLU's plan to promote and win real protections for the most vulnerable in our • commurrities includes securing the adoption and enforcement of the following local policies and rules:
ACLU's 9 "model" state and local law enforcement policies and rules.
Defend our friends, families and neighbors from Trump's mass deportation agenda:
#1) The Judicial Warrant Rufe: [County/City/State] officials shall require a judicial warrant prior to detaining an individual or in any manner prolonging the detention of an individual at the request of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) or Customs and Border Protection (CBP). #2) No Facilitation Rule: [County/City/State] officials shall not arrest, detain, or transport an individual solely on the basis of an immigration detainer or other administrative document issued by ICE or CBP, without a judicial warrant.
#3) Defined Access/Interview Rule: Unless acting pursuant to a court order or a legitimate law enforcement purpose that is unrelated to the enforcement of a civil immigration law, no [County/City/State] official shall permit ICE or CBP agents access to [County/City/State] facilities or any person in [County/City/State] custody for investigative interviews or other investigative purposes. #4) Clear Identification Rule: To the extent ICE or CBP has been granted access to [County/City/State] facilities, individuals with whom ICE or CBP engages will be notified that they are speaking with ICE or CBP, and ICE or CBP agents shall be required to wear duty jackets and make their badges visible at all times while in [County/City/State] facilities.
Protect our friends, families and neighbors' privacy from the Trump administration:
#5) Don't Ask Rule: [County/City/State] officials shall not inquire into the immigration or citizenship status of an individual, except where the inquiry relates to a legitimate law enforcement purpose that is unrelated to the enforcement of a civil immigration law, or where required by state or federal law to verify eligibility for a benefit, service, or license conditioned on verification of certain status. #6) Privacy Protection Rule: No [County/City/State] official shall voluntarily release personally identifiable data or information to ICE or CBP regarding an inmate's custody status, release date or home address, or information that may be used to ascertain an individual's religion, ethnicity or race, unless for a law enforcement purpose unrelated to the enforcement of a civil immigration law. #7) Discriminatory Surveillance Prohibition Rule: No [County/City/State] agency or official shall authorize or engage in the human or technological surveillance of a person or group based solely or primarily upon a person or group's actual or perceived religion, ethnicity, race, or immigration status.
Help our friends, families and neighbors get redress when abuses and mistakes occur:
#8) Redress Rule: Any person who alleges a violation of this policy may file a written complaint for investigation with [oversight entity].
Help ensure our friends, families, and neighbors are protected from discrimination:
#9) Fair and Impartial Policing Rule: No [County/City/State] official shall interrogate, arrest, detain or take other law enforcement action against an individual based upon that individual's perceived race, national origin, religion, language, or immigration status, unless such personal characteristics have been included in timely, relevant, credible information from a reliable source, linking a specific individual to a particular criminal event/activity.
Final Note: The Trump Administration has asserted, falsely, that if localities do not help advance Trump's mass deportation agenda, they are violating federal law. The following rule, which is the QlliY. applicable federal law in this April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 620 of 651
area, would help ensure your city, county or town establishes its clear intent not to violate federal law. While n.ot a necessary addition, this rule may be a useful complement to the above policies. 1373 Rule: Under 8 U.S.C. § 1373 and 8 U.S.C. § 1644, federal law prohibits [County/City/State] officials from imposing limits on maintaining, exchanging, sending, or receiving information regarding citizenship and immigration status with any Federal, State, or local government entity. Nothing in [County/City/State] policies is intended to violate 8 U.S.C. § 1373 and 8 U.S.C. § 1644.
How Peogle Power activists can helg the ACLU make their communi:tv_a "Freedom City"
The "Freedom Cities' campaign is a complex and powerful strategy. It requires fighting on multiple fronts with multiple tactics, but it can be scaled and sequenced to accommodate action by groups that are big or small and whether your target is city or county government.
At the heart of this strategy, People Power volunteers will put pressure on elected officials and local law enforcement officials through targeted grassroots action to urge adoption of the "Freedom Cities" nine "model" state and local law enforcement policies.
As a volunteer organizer you don't have to understand all the ins and outs of the legal language to advocate for these policies and rules. What you need to know and advocate for is that these are the policies and rules for law enforcement that the ACLU has determined our cities, towns and counties need to protect Muslims, immigrants and refugees from some of the worst abuses of the Trump administration.
Your city or county may already have adopted some of these policies, but only in rare instances has a community adopted all nine. If your community has done so, contact us and we will enlist you to help nearby communities.
Every local campaign will get started in the same way - by using your March 11 Action Events to organize meetings with local law enforcement officials - but each campaign will evolve to meet local needs.
At your March 11 action event
(Download the March 11 Agenda for hosts) I
Plan a meeting with local law enforcement officials
Plan a meeting with the chief law enforcement officer in your community within the next two weeks.
Typically this is either your county sheriff or your police chief. If you're in a big city, your best option to obtain a meeting may be approaching your local precinct commanding officer.
To set up a meeting, call your the local office of your top law enforcement officer and say that you are a member of the community who would like to schedule a meeting for a group of local residents. They will ask you how many and if it's under 10 say the number in your group. If it's over 10 ask how many people they can accommodate in their conference room and go from there.
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 621 of 651
If the; administrative scheduler asks, the topic you want to discuss at this meeting is "Adoption of the ACLU's , mpd,el state and local law enforcement policies and rules to effectively counter or block cooperation with Trump's anti-immigrant and anti-refugee agenda."
It may be the case that you can't meet with the top law enforcement officer. In these instances ask to meet with the highest level staffer available to meet. Ask for the soonest possible appointment and then invite members of your group. Realize that not everyone will be able to attend and the most important thing is for some of you to attend this meeting and soon is better than later. A meeting at lunch time if available would be preferable, but you may just have to accept whatever time is offered.
Here's what attending this meeting will entail. The day of the meeting, gather 20 minutes before your meeting time at a location near the office where the meeting will take place (this could be the building's lobby). This ensures that you can show up all together and on time. Appoint a chief spokesperson who will be responsible for making a forceful ask during your meeting.
At the meeting, everyone should offer a brief personal introduction (name, neighborhood, profession if they wish).
Then the spokesperson will present the ACLU's nine model policies and rules for local law enforcement and ask where the law enforcement official stands on each one.
The goal of the meeting is to get the law enforcement official to tell you for each of the nine rules/policies if it is currently in place in your jurisdiction. Get a yes or no answer. If the answer is no, ask whether the sheriff, police chief or local precinct commander would support it (again, yes or no).
Be polite and cordial, but persistent. Your local official may be evasive. Ask as many times as you have to to get a clear yes or no, and don't hesitate to call out evasiveness if you see it.
Don't get into arguments about the substance of the rules - it's not your responsibility to explain or defend the nitty gritty details of these policies. Your law enforcement officials can always contact us at [email protected] if they want to talk to a policy or legal expert. It's your job to make it clear that these policies are what the community wants, and that you will work to ensure they're adopted.
Thank the official or officials who met with you and let them know that you will be reporting their replies back to the ACLU.
After the meeting, make sure someone in your group is responsible for filling out the report back form on your meeting.
You can access that form
at: https://docs.google.corn/forms/d/e/1 FAlpQLSfj3sSBR2LMtsouzU0EejtaiGovxSGeernpiGTAkTY _IF1 xew/viewform Assign roles and plan next steps
• Assign a person or group of people to schedule a meeting with local law enforcement officials in the next two weeks.
• Assign a person or group of people to ensure that everyone attending the March 11 meeting is invited to the local law enforcement meeting once scheduled.
• As a group, decide on a time and place for your group's next organizing meeting. It's better if you can schedule your law enforcement meeting before your next organizing meeting so plan this one for two or more weeks out.
• Assign a representative of the group to post the next organizing meeting at map.peoplepower.org • Assign a representative to scan and upload attendance sheets Sneak Peek: Your next People Power action meeting
Your next organizing meeting
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 622 of 651
---------------------------·-------------
Your resistance training was only the beginning. We're counting on you to hold another organizing meeting so you can get to work in your community. Ideally this meeting will be after your meeting with local law enforcement • off1c1als -- so think about scheduling 1t two or more weeks out. At this gathering, you'll go over the results e~ your· ~ meeting with law enforcement officials if you were able to obtain one. If you were not able to meet, call your local county sheriff's office and inquire about which of the ACLU's nine model rules and policies for local law enforcement are already in place.
In this meeting determine your targeting based on your research into what policies are in place or supported by local law enforcement. Make a list of local elected officials you can pressure to adopt the "Freedom Cities" policies and rules that are not already in place in your city or county, Key pressure points may include:
• County Sheriff
• Mayor
• City Council Members
• Police Chief
• Other local elected officials (e.g. County Executive) In this meeting you'll also choose what tactics your group wants to pursue to urge adoption of the "Freedom Cites" rules and policies. Find below suggested key tactics, though your group may have even more ideas, Big groups may want to start with working groups taking on multiple tactics. Smaller groups may want to choose just one. • Making calls and/or sending letters to elected officials' offices • Meeting with elected officials in person
• Holding town hall meetings with invitations to elected officials • Organizing protests and rallies at offices of elected officials, at ICE field offices • Gathering and presenting petition signatures
• Attending/testifying at city council or county board meeting • Writing letters to the editor of your local newspaper • Showing active solidarity with Muslims, immigrants and refugees at Mosques citizenship ceremonies, through volunteering at "Know Your Rights" trainings or refugee resettlement offices • Posting "We Welcome Immigrants and Refugees" signs on your windows and doors Our events map at map.peoplepower.org is the hub of our Freedom Cities campaign. Whenever you organize a campaign tactic, you should post it there so that other activists in your community can find out about it and attend.
If you post your event a few days in advance and if it's consistent with our guidelines, we will try to help you recruit people to attend by calling and texting nearby People Power activists. New people are signing up for People Power every day, so this is a great way to get new people involved in your campaign, Published by Q.Q.Qgle Drive - ReP-ort Abuse - Updated automatically every 5 minutes April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 623 of 651
✓- f:t:J(MA ·Pasadena Ci~ Resolutron
RESOLUTION No. ___ _
A RESOLUTION OF_ THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASADENA, CALIFORNIA
ENHANCING SAFETY, REFUGE AND EQUAL OPPORTUNITY FOR ALL
Immigrants historically have been a part of Pasadena's rich history. Pasadena is one of the most diverse ·cities in the San Gabriel Valley, and we have welcomed everyone who seeks to realize their dreams and build their families here, regardless of national origin or immigration status. In this environment, Pasadena has consi_stently been a champion of inclusiveness and tolerance. Today, more than 31 % of our residents are foreign~born. As in other Southern california cities, immigrants are a large part of the engine of our economy. More than that, immigrants have woven the social, cultural and civic fabric of Pasadena from our educational institutions to our artistic stages, from the halls of government to community activism, from our culinary scene to our fields of play. As a . community, we have a long-standing commitment to immigrants in Pasadena. More recently, our Council adopted Council Resolution No. 9319 in 2013, which calls for humane and comprehensive immigration reform and specifies that local governments like Pasadena should not be required to enforce federal immigration law. Most recently, in November and December 2016, our Council discussed concerns as to how the incoming federal administration's policies might affect Pasadena, and our Council reiterated our commitment as expressed in Council Resolution No. 9319. At that time, we reaffirmed that our City . would not be involved in any federal immigration enforcement activities.
Recent events in our region and ac;:ross our nation have prompted our community and this Council to make clear-our established vision that all Pasadena -residents,. regardless of immigration status, are connected to community resources, have access to critical government se~ices, are engaged in civic life, and are informed about critical immigration law and policy. This Council's most solemn responsibility is to keep all of our City's people safe, and to strongly support our Police Department's existing policies with respect to federal immigration laws. This support is rooted in the principle that all of Pasadena .is safer when our Police Department maintains a relationship of trust, respect and cooperation with all City residents. When people feel confident that they can come forward as a victim of, or witness to a crime, irrespective of immigration status, our Police Department's ability to • protect and serve all is enhanced.
All residents of Pasadena must feel safe and supported when accessing the vast _ array of City facilities, programs, and services available to them. City employees shall maintain a~d protect sensitive information regarding the immigration status of our - - residents.fcio City employee will use City funds or resources to assist in the enforcement of federal im~igration law or to gather or disseminate information regarding t~e immigration ' . • \ • \JI/\ . • 03/27/2017
~ ]' Item 12
' ~ • Distributed by staff
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 624 of 651
status of individuals ·in the City unless such assistance is required by federal or state statute, regulationf or court decisi~ Our police department shall not directly assist in investigating, detaining or arresting individuals for violations of federal immigration law. Our local resources should be focused on local issues.
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASADENA AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1: The City Council of the City of Pasadena, California, hereby finds, determines, and declares as follows:
The City of Pasadena will not enforce federal immigration laws ~nd the City Manager will ensure that all City policies are consistent with this declaration.
Section 2: The City Council of the City of Pasadena, California, hereby finds, determines, and declares as follows:
The City Manager will ensure that the Pasadena Police Department maintains an . immigration policy that is consistent with proposed Policy 428 and the provisions of this resolution. Among other provisions, said policy reiterates that the Department does not investigate and prosecute violations of federal immigration laws.
Section 3: The City Council of the City of Pasadena, California, hereby finds, determines, and declares as follows:
The City Manager will ensure that the City's Manual of Personnel & Ac;lministrative Rules, Section 2, City-Wide Policies and Standards of Conduct, is consistent with this • resolution.
Section 4: The City Council of the City of Pasadena, California, hereby finds, determines, and declares as follows:
All City Commissions shall conduct their business in compliance with the direction provided in this resolution.
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 625 of 651
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 626 of 651
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 627 of 651
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 628 of 651
AGENDA REPORT
RECREATION AND COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT 208 PARK AVENUE, SAN FERNANDO, CA 91340 (818) 898-1290 WWW.SFCITY.ORG REVIEW: ☒ Finance Director ☒ Deputy City Manager ☒ City Manager To: Mayor Mary Mendoza and Councilmembers
From: Nick Kimball, City Manager
By: Julio Salcedo, Director of Recreation and Community Services Juan Salas, Recreation and Community Services Supervisor
Date: April 7, 2025
Subject: Discussion and Consideration to Accept the Donation of a Recognition Plaque for former Park Directors Julian Leon and Jess Margarito, and Authorize Installation of the Plaque at Las Palmas Park
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that City Council:
a. Discuss the donation of a recognition plaque for former Park Directors Julian Leon and Jess Margarito;
AND
b. Accept the donation of a commemorative plaque from a local group of San Fernando residents (Attachment “A”);
c. Authorize Public Works to install the plaque;
d. Review and approve any necessary edits or modifications to the plaque text, ensuring the final version aligns with the City’s values and standards; and
e. Authorize the group of San Fernando residents spearheading this project to host an unveiling ceremony for the public.
OR
f. Provide direction to staff, as applicable.
BACKGROUND:
1. On September 25, 2024, Manny Granillo approached Recreation and Community Services (RCS) staff about developing and displaying a plaque at Las Palmas Park commemorating former staff members, Julian Leon and Jess Margarito, for their contributions as Department Directors for the City of San Fernando.
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 629 of 651
Discussion and Consideration to Accept the Donation of a Recognition Plaque for former Park Directors Julian Leon and Jess Margarito, and Authorize Installation of the Plaque at Las Palmas Park
2. On November 8, 2024, a group of San Fernando residents met with RCS staff regarding the location and size of the plaque. The residents were all former neighborhood program participants whose lives were heavily influenced by the leadership of Julian Leon and Jess Margarito.
3. On February 3, 2025, RCS staff received a proof of the plaque (Attachment “A”).
4. On March 13, 2025, the Parks, Wellness, and Recreation (PWR) Commission held its regular monthly meeting, during which the Commission received a presentation regarding the proposed plaque donation and heard public comments in support of the request. Following discussion, the PWR Commission voted to recommend that the City Council approve the donation, installation, and public unveiling of the plaque honoring Julian Leon and Jess Margarito. The City Council is also requested to review and approve the proposed text and images to ensure alignment with the City’s values.
ANALYSIS:
A commemorative community plaque serves as a lasting tribute or recognition of an important event, individual, organization, or cultural heritage within a community. Its purpose can vary depending on the context, but generally, commemorative plaques preserve history, celebrate achievements, enhance community identity, honor and remember.
The proposed plaque, funded by a group of San Fernando residents, is intended to honor former Recreation Directors, Julian Leon (1956-1969) and Jess Margarito (1969-1979) for their leadership, commitment to sportsmanship, and an understanding of the neighborhood.
According to the community proponents of this plaque, Mr. Leon and Mr. Margarito “provided a safe park environment and a willingness to teach.” This effort has been led by community members Manny Granillo, Mark Marquez, Alfred Calzadillas, and Richard Villa, who organized fundraising efforts to cover the cost of the plaque.
The plaque is proposed to be installed in the front lobby of Las Palmas Park. The residents have requested that the City’s Public Works Department handle the installation at no cost to them, while they will assume all expenses associated with the unveiling ceremony, which is tentatively scheduled for late June 2025.
Public Works staff has reviewed the proposal for installation of the plaque and determined that the project is feasible, requiring minimal site preparation before installation. Staff will need to identify structural beams on the designated wall to ensure the plaque is securely mounted.
The proposed plaque was reviewed by PWR Commission on March 13, 2025, and the Commission voted to approve this item, thereby recommending that the City Council approve this request. If approved, the plaque will take approximately eight (8) weeks to produce.
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 630 of 651
Discussion and Consideration to Accept the Donation of a Recognition Plaque for former Park Directors Julian Leon and Jess Margarito, and Authorize Installation of the Plaque at Las Palmas Park
In considering the proposal to install a plaque honoring two (2) individuals, it is essential to thoroughly evaluate their historical actions and the implications of such recognition. Recent research has revealed that one (1) of the individuals, Jess Margarito, was terminated from employment by the City in 1994 and ultimately plead guilty to charges of misappropriating public funds. Mr. Margarito was sentenced to three years’ probation and 200 hours of community service for signing timesheets for work that was never done, as reported in The San Fernando Valley Sun article of January 13, 2021 (Attachment “B”).
Therefore, it is recommended that City Council provide direction on approving acceptance of donations.
BUDGET IMPACT:
The plaque will be funded and purchased by the local resident group. The installation will be provided by the Public Works Department, with nominal estimated staff time and material costs.
CONCLUSION:
It is recommended that the City Council discuss the proposed plaque and provide direction, as appropriate.
ATTACHMENTS:
A. Plaque Proof
B. San Fernando Valley Sun Article
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 631 of 651
ATTACHMENT “A”
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 632 of 651
3/6/25, 4:31 PM
Jess Margarito
"An Eagle Warrior Has Fallen" - The San Fernando Valley Sun "An Eagle Warrior Has Fallen"
by By Mike Terry and Diana Martinez, SFV Sun/El Sol
January 13, 2021
Jess Margarito, a lifelong resident of the City of San Fernando who was the first Chicano elected to the city council and who also served as mayor, has died from complications of the COVID-19 virus. He was 73.
Margarito passed away on Jan. 8, 2021. He began battling the virus in mid-December, and at one point was placed into a medically-induced coma at the UCLA Medical Center, according to daughter Analisa Margarito Flores, the second of Margarito's three children. She has an older sister, Yolanda Margarito Montoya, and a younger brother, Jesse, Jr.
Margarito's wife of 50 years, Cecilia, also became ill from the virus and spent several days in an intensive care unit but is recovering, Flores said.
https://sanfernandosun .com/2021/01 /13/an-eagle-warrior-has-fallen/ 1/5 ATTACHMENT "B"
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 633 of 651
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 634 of 651
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 635 of 651
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 636 of 651
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 637 of 651
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 638 of 651
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 639 of 651
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 640 of 651
AGENDA REPORT
REVIEW: ☒ Finance Director ☒ Deputy City Manager ☒ City Manager CITY COUNCIL 117 MACNEIL STREET, SAN FERNANDO, CA 91340 (818) 898-1201 WWW.SFCITY.ORG To: Vice Mayor Mary Solorio and Councilmembers
From: Mayor Mary Mendoza
Date: April 7, 2025
Subject: Consideration to Appoint a Parks, Wellness and Recreation Commissioner RECOMMENDATION:
I have requested to place on the agenda (Attachment “A”) for the City Council to approve Flor Sanchez (Exhibit “A” to Attachment “A”) be appointed as my representative to the Parks, Wellness and Recreation Commission.
BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS:
1. Pursuant to the City’s Code (Attachment “B”), each Councilmember may appoint one (1) Commissioner to each Commission (i.e., Planning and Preservation Commission; Parks, Wellness, and Recreation Commission; Transportation and Public Safety Commission; and Education Commission), with such appointment to be ratified by the full City Council. For appointment consideration, interested residents must submit an application to the nominating City Councilmember, at which time the proposed appointment considered by the City Council to approve and ratify.
2. On March 19, 2025, Mayor Mendoza removed appointed representative Fredy Ortega, as authorized under the San Fernando Municipal Code Section 2-403(a) and (b), Removal of Commission Members; Vacancies (Attachment “C”). This immediately created an unscheduled Commissioner vacancy effective, March 20, 2025.
3. On March 20, 2025, the City Clerk posted an Unscheduled Vacancy Notice (Attachment “D”), pursuant to Government Code Section 54974 that states: “Final appointment to the board commission or committee shall not be made by the legislative body for at least 10 working days after the posting of the notice in the clerk’s office.”
4. On March 20, 2025, Flor Sanchez submitted an application (Exhibit “A” to Attachment “A”) seeking consideration as my representative to be appointed to the Parks, Wellness and Recreation Commission to fill the unscheduled vacancy.
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 641 of 651
Consideration to Appoint a Parks, Wellness and Recreation Commissioner
BUDGET IMPACT:
The City pays each Commissioner $100 for attendance at up to one (1) Commission meeting per month. A total of $1,200 per Commissioner is appropriated in each responsible Department’s budget. Sufficient funds are included in the Fiscal Year 2024-2025 adopted Budget.
CONCLUSION:
I recommend that Flor Sanchez be appointed as my representative to the Parks, Wellness and Recreation Commission to fill the Commissioner unscheduled vacancy.
ATTACHMENTS:
A. Request to Agendize an Item for City Council Discussion/Consideration Exhibit “A”: Commissioner Application
B. City Code Pertaining to Each Commission
C. City Code Pertaining to Removal of Commission Members D. Unscheduled Vacancy Notice
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 642 of 651
City Council | 117 Macneil Street | San Fernando, CA 91340 | (818) 898-1201 | Form # CC-003.1 (07/2017) | Page 1 of 1
REQUEST TO AGENDIZE AN ITEM FOR CITY COUNCIL
DISCUSSION/CONSIDERATION
CITY COUNCILMEMBER INFORMATION
NAME TITLE
ITEM INFORMATION
SUBJECT Title of the item you are requesting to be agendized.
PRIORITIES
Is this included in the current FY priorities?
Yes No
BUDGET
Is this a budgeted item?
Yes No
FISCAL IMPACT
Is there a fiscal impact? If yes, indicate amount.
Yes No $
BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS Provide the reason you are requesting this item be agendized.
ATTACHMENTS Do you have any attachments to include?
Yes No
RECOMMENDATION Indicate the direction you are recommending. dd,D
EdΗΗ
Mary Mendoza Mayor
CONSIDERATION TO APPOINT A PARKS, WELLNESS & RECREATION COMMISSIONER ✔ ✔ ✔
I am requesting this item to appoint Flor Sanchez as my Parks, Wellness and Recreation Commissioner, replacing my former commissioner, Fredy Ortega. Flor has gained valuable experience as a member of the Planning and Preservation Commission, where she has shown a strong commitment to understanding the City of San Fernando and its governance.
She has recently expressed a deep interest in the Parks, Wellness and Recreation Commission and is committed to enhancing recreational spaces and promoting wellness initiatives throughout the city. Her passion for public spaces is evident in her personal connection to the City's parks, where she frequently walks her two dogs.
Flor's dedication to community engagement and her enthusiasm for improving San Fernando's recreational and wellness programs makes her a strong candidate for this position. I respectfully request the Council's support in approving her appointment to the Parks, Wellness and Recreation Commission.
I recommend that Flor Sanchez be appointed as my representative to the Parks, Wellness and Recreation Commission.
✔
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 643 of 651
EXHIBIT "A" TO ATTACHMENT "A"
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 644 of 651
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 645 of 651
Bio
Flor Sanchez
Flor Sanchez has proudly called San Fernando home since 2010. She and her young family—her husband and two daughters—moved to the city with many dreams as they purchased their first home. They were excited to begin raising their daughters in a house, fulfilling a part of the American dream that so many aspire to.
She holds a Bachelor of Science in Financial Planning from California State University, Northridge (CSUN).
Flor has built a diverse career that includes significant community service contributions during her tenure at three of the top entertainment companies. She collaborated with organizations such as Children’s Hospital Los Angeles and TreePeople, reflecting her commitment to giving back.
As the co-founder of Smart Money Financial Services, Flor is passionate about empowering her community by improving financial literacy and promoting generational wealth within underserved populations.
For over 13 years, Flor was deeply involved in Girl Scouts, volunteering her time and leadership to help young girls, including her daughters, grow into confident and capable individuals. Earlier this year, Flor organized a neighborhood event where she invited the Chief of Police to speak with residents about issues impacting their side of town. This initiative showcased her dedication to fostering dialogue and solutions within her community.
With her expertise in financial planning and management, Flor brings valuable skills to her role, aiming to contribute a solid foundation of fiscal responsibility and innovative solutions to the city’s initiatives.
Now empty nesters with both daughters off to college, Flor and her husband find themselves with more time to focus on the community they love. Flor is eager to deepen her involvement in San Fernando, contributing her skills and passion to make a meaningful impact.
In her free time, Flor enjoys photography, exploring new software and coding languages, traveling to discover new perspectives, and spending quality time with her husband.
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 646 of 651
City Code Pertaining to All Commissions
PARKS, WELLNESS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
Sec. 54-56. Created.
There is created and established a recreation and community services commission in and for the city, which shall be known as the "parks, wellness and recreation commission." All references in this Code to the "recreation and community services" commission shall be to the parks, wellness and recreation commission.
(Ord. No. 1586, § 4, 3-16-2009)
Sec. 54-57. Composition and appointment of members.
The parks, wellness and recreation commission shall consist of five members, each with full participation and voting rights. Each member shall be appointed by a different appointing councilperson, with such appointment to be ratified by the city council. Such members of the parks, wellness and recreation commission shall be registered voters and city residents. (Ord. No. 1586, § 4, 3-16-2009)
Sec. 54-58. Officers.
The members shall organize the parks, wellness and recreation commission and shall select a chair and vice-chair. In the absence of the chair and vice-chair, any other member shall call the commission to order, whereupon a chair shall be elected from the members present to preside for that meeting. (Ord. No. 1586, § 4, 3-16-2009)
Sec. 54-59. Compensation of members.
The council shall fix the amount of compensation, if any, to be paid to the members of the parks, wellness and recreation commission.
(Ord. No. 1586, § 4, 3-16-2009)
Sec. 54-60. Meetings generally.
Members of the parks, wellness and recreation commission shall meet at such time and place as may be fixed by resolution.
(Ord. No. 1586, § 4, 3-16-2009)
Sec. 54-61. Quorum.
Three members of the parks, wellness and recreation commission shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business, but a lesser number may adjourn from time to time for want of a quorum until a quorum can be obtained.
ATTACHMENT "B"
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 647 of 651
City Code Pertaining to All Commissions
(Ord. No. 1586, § 4, 3-16-2009)
Sec. 54-62. Absence from meetings.
(a) Absence from three consecutive regular meetings of the parks, wellness and recreation commission by a member with or without consent of the commission shall be deemed to constitute a retirement of such member, and his office shall become vacant. The vacancy thus created shall thereafter be filled by appointment by the city councilmember so assigned of a successor to fill the unexpired term of office. (b) Absence from three regular meetings of the commission in a 12-month period by a member without consent of the commission or absence from four regular meetings of the commission within a 12-month period by a member with the consent of the commission shall be deemed to constitute a retirement of such member, and the office shall become vacant. The vacancy thus created shall thereafter be filled by appointment by the city councilmember so assigned of a successor to fill the unexpired term of office. (Ord. No. 1586, § 4, 3-16-2009)
Sec. 54-63. Powers and duties generally.
The powers and duties of the parks, wellness and recreation commission shall be:
(1) Initiating studies, investigations and surveys and making recommendations to the city council relative to the creation, operation, maintenance, management and control of the community recreation programs of parks, playgrounds and indoor and outdoor recreational activities. (2) Subject to the prior approval of the city council, adopting by resolution, rules and regulations not inconsistent with this code and city ordinances, for the maintenance, improvement, use and operation of the parks, playgrounds, bathing facilities, recreation centers and other similar facilities of the city. A complete file of such rules and regulations shall be maintained in both the city clerk's office and that of the director of recreation and community services, with resolutions in the customary form and numbered numerically.
(3) Participate in the development of a master plan for all parks and playgrounds owned and operated by the city and, upon approval of the plans by the city council, working consistently toward the achievement of the plan and for the improvement of the plan as originally approved. (4) Initiating studies, investigations and surveys and making recommendations to the city council relative to health, wellness and fitness, including such activities and programs created and/or maintained for the same by the director of recreation and community services. (5) Upon request of the city council, making other investigations, reports and recommendations upon subjects or other matters referred to it by the city council. (Ord. No. 1586, § 4, 3-16-2009)
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 648 of 651
City Code Pertaining to All Commissions
Sec. 54-64. Powers and duties concerning city-owned historic resources.
The following sites and improvements are declared by the city council to be historic resources. The parks, wellness, and recreation commission shall have responsibility for programming the maintenance, improvement, use and operation of these city-owned historic resources, subject to approval by the city council:
(1) The Lopez Adobe site including the Lopez Adobe and the Lopez-Villegas House at the southwesterly corner of the intersection of South Maclay Avenue and Pico Street. (2) Such other historic resources as the council shall from time to time select and add to this section by amendment.
(Ord. No. 1586, § 4, 3-16-2009)
Sec. 54-65. Rules and regulations.
Subject to the approval of the city council, the parks, wellness and recreation commission may make and alter such rules and regulations for its organization and procedures as are consistent with this article and other sections of this Code and city ordinances and with state laws. (Ord. No. 1586, § 4, 3-16-2009)
Sec. 54-66. Reports and records.
The parks, wellness and recreation commission shall keep an accurate record of all its proceedings and transactions and shall render annually, on a calendar basis, a full report of the commission's transactions and recommendations to the council.
(Ord. No. 1586, § 4, 3-16-2009)
Sec. 54-67. Incurring financial liability.
Neither the parks, wellness and recreation commission nor any person connected with the commission shall incur any financial liability in the name of the city.
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 649 of 651
ATTACHMENT “C”
Created: 2025-02-10 11:07:08 [EST]
(Supp. No. 40)
Sec. 2-403. Removal of commission members; vacancies.
(a) All commissioners serve at the pleasure of the city council and any commissioner may be removed, with or without cause, either by a majority of the entire membership of the city council or by the councilmember who individually appointed such commissioner.
(b) If vacancies in any commission occur, other than by expiration of the term, such vacancies shall be filled by appointment for the unexpired portion of the term. The city council member who nominated the vacating commission member shall nominate a replacement commissioner, subject to ratification by a majority of the city council.
(Ord. No. 1648, § 3, 12-7-2015)
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 650 of 651
MAYOR
VICE MAYOR
UNSCHEDULED VACANCY NOTICE
City of San Fernando
Parks, Wellness and Recreation Commission
The San Fernando City Council is now accepting applications for appointment to the San Fernando Parks, Wellness and Recreation Commission (“Commission”) to fill one (1) unscheduled vacancy for the term of office from the date of appointment through December 2025 and shall continue in the position until replaced by the appointing City Councilmember or until the member resigns.
Applicants must be at least 18 years old and reside within the City jurisdiction. It is encouraged that applicants be involved or employed in the field of Parks, Wellness and Recreation Services, and culture or related subjects. Commissioners receive a monthly meeting attendance stipend of $100.00.
The Parks, Wellness and Recreation Commission consists of five (5) Commission members. During the Commission’s annual reorganization, Commissioners must choose members to serve as Chair and as Vice Chair; and the terms of office shall be for one (1) year or until successors are chosen.
Monthly Meetings are held on the second Thursday, beginning at 6:30 p.m. in the City Hall Council Chambers, at 117 Macneil Street, San Fernando, California 91340.
Applications will be accepted from March 20, 2025, until the vacancy is filled. For additional information, please contact Julia Fritz, City Clerk at (818) 898-1204 or via email at [email protected].
Dated this 20th day of March, 2025
City of San Fernando, California
_________________________
Julia Fritz, CMC
City Clerk
cc: Mayor Mary Mendoza
Julio Salcedo, Director of Recreation and Community Services ATTACHMENT "D"
April 7, 2025 CC Special & Regular Mtg Page 651 of 651