A resolution that seeks to ban federal immigration enforcement on city property will go to the Sacramento City Council within the next month after it gained unanimous support from the council’s Law and Legislation committee Tuesday morning.
The resolution follows both unrest and protest of ICE activity within the city of Sacramento, as well as violent immigration enforcement operations in other parts of the country, such as Minneapolis and Chicago.
Caity Maple chairs the committee, which is made up of four city council members, and also represents District 5 on the council. She acknowledged recent criticism from the community, as many in the audience felt the city is not moving fast or strongly enough against ICE operations locally.
“I think that today is another step forward but there’s lots of work to do,” said Maple, one of the four committee members.
The committee also directed staff to look into reports of police misconduct with protestors, how the city shares data and collaborates with different levels of law enforcement and if the city can support legislation surrounding banning masks for ICE agents. A federal judge this week blocked a state law seeking to ban federal agents from wearing masks due to an exemption for state police.
Sacramento updated its immigration policy platform last month to signal its allegiance to the city’s immigrants – which make up about 20% of the population. Hundreds of public commenters filled city chambers and approximately 700 people left e-comments on the city’s website, calling on their elected officials to protect the region’s most vulnerable.
Enforcement not clear just yet
If approved, the resolution directs Sacramento’s new city manager Marakeisha Smith to develop a policy that bans immigration enforcement and activity on city property. It also asks her to develop a record system for ICE-related incidents that occur on city-owned land.
The resolution defines property as “any property or facility owned or controlled by the city, including but not limited to any parking lot, vacant lot, garage, building warehouse, or residential property”.
The ordinance also calls for the creation of free signage for property owners that hope to restrict ICE activity.
Smith was not immediately available for comment, and the Law and Legislation Committee did not discuss how the policy would be enforced during their meeting.
A spokesperson for the Sacramento Police Department said in a statement the agency is unaware of any routine ICE enforcement or staging operations on city property. The department also declined to comment further on the resolution.
Community members and activists say it’s not enough
Those in the audience who spoke at Tuesday’s committee meeting mainly supported the resolution, but said the city needs to do more, and put more checks and balances on the Sacramento Police Department. Resolutions are typically crafted as expressions of city policy, but aren’t the same as legally-binding city ordinances which can carry penalties.
Moiz Mir, an activist with the Asian American Liberation Network, told CapRadio he came to the meeting to advocate for expanding the resolution beyond just physical spaces.
“ It defines property very narrowly and defines city resources very narrowly,” he said. “We want them to expand that definition to not just physical property, things like parking lots, but also expand that to the city’s surveillance infrastructure.”
Mir said companies the city contracts with to generate data, such as gunfire audio detection company ShotSpotter, can give that data to ICE.
“That’s data the city is paying to generate, and those contractors should be accountable to the city’s sanctuary policy direction,” he said.
Many in attendance also called on the council to investigate Sac PD’s actions towards civilians during protests against ICE and demanded the council ensure no data on civilians is being sent to federal law enforcement.
Allison Smith, spokesperson for Sac PD, told CapRadio in a phone interview she is unaware of any incident where the city’s police department aided federal enforcement efforts or harassed civilians during protests.
“We support people’s First Amendment right to lawfully protest,” Smith said.
No law enforcement officials spoke at the committee meeting.
Giselle Garcia, program director with activist group NorCal Resist, told CapRadio the city needs to move quicker, but acknowledged this could be a good first step towards accountability.
“ We often compare what will be next after this kind of nightmare period to us having to have something similar to the Nuremberg trials,” Garcia said. “ Initiatives like this essentially pave the way so that if there are violations of the law we can now have a legal grounds to challenge that.”
The resolution will go to the city council within 30 days.
CapRadio provides a trusted source of news because of you. As a nonprofit organization, donations from people like you sustain the journalism that allows us to discover stories that are important to our audience. If you believe in what we do and support our mission, please donate today.