Proposed Repeal Of Policy Limiting Local Fed Immigration Help Fails

SAN DIEGO, CA — An attempt to repeal an existing San Diego County policy limiting local assistance for federal immigration enforcement failed Tuesday, with two Board of Supervisors members voting in favor, one opposing and one abstaining.

Jim Desmond proposed repealing the existing policy, claiming it makes the county a "super sanctuary" for people living in the country illegally by limiting local assistance for federal immigration enforcement.

Desmond and Joel Anderson voted yes, while Supervisor Monica Montgomery Stepped voted no and Terra Lawson-Remer abstained. Three votes were needed for the repeal to take effect.

Specifically, Desmond's policy directed the county's chief administrative officer to "report back within 180 days on the data related to any transfers or notifications during the past year to federal immigration authorities and provide recommendations" on how to effectively carry it out, according to a board letter.

In a statement after the Tuesday vote, Desmond said the outcome "was deeply disappointing."

"This was not about politics," said Desmond, a Republican who is also a candidate for 49th Congressional District in 2026.

"This was about ensuring that criminals -- child abusers, burglars and violent offenders -- are removed from our communities. Instead, fear and misinformation won the day, leaving law-abiding residents at greater risk."

During the meeting, Montgomery Steppe said the federal government enforces immigration policy -- not the county, which needs to focus on more important issues, such as its residents losing vital funding that may be cut in the new federal budget.

"I really don't think it's in our best interest to continue to invest in even higher levels for our local law enforcement to do the federal government's job," she added.

Anderson said that given the county sheriff decides whether to enforce the existing policy, "it's a waste of time to start with, and it's a waste of time that we're having to go through this."

He noted that residents in his district are worried about fire safety. In a later statement, Anderson said the original policy "did nothing and impacted nothing. The repeal of it does and impacts nothing."

Board Vice Chair Lawson-Remer in a statement said that the county "will not be diverting limited county resources to mass deportations of the hundreds of thousands of local residents who work and go to school, pay taxes and serve as essential members of our community -- as firefighters and first responders, teachers and engineers, childcare providers, nurses and farmworkers."

Several dozen people spoke on the proposed repeal, with most opposed. Those in favor of the repeal cited public safety as a major factor.

Dorthea Flanagan, a resident of the Gopher Canyon community, said her grandfather came from the former Yugoslavia and had to live in the United States for five years before his family could join him.

"He did it the right way," Flanagan said, adding she supported Desmond "for proposing this repeal to the folly of a super-sanctuary status."

"Let (U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement) do their job," she added. "We want to be safe."
"We have to have secure borders to have a sovereign country," one man told the board. Otherwise, he added, "the U.S. Constitution no longer exists."

Opponents said the original policy made sense, in terms of both legality and human rights.
"Separating families and deportations are not patriotic, and do not reflect the moral values of most citizens," said a man with the San Diego Organizing Project, who also called out supporters of the Trump administration's immigration policy.

Chula Vista resident A.J. Estrada said he grew up in a household with at least one immigrant parent, like 19% of U.S. citizens. He pointed out that undocumented individuals are 26% less likely to be convicted of homicide and 50% less likely to be arrested for a violent crime.

Estrada said the real goal of repealing the existing county policy is "to make communities like mine, my family, my mother, my wife to be afraid to participate in civil society."

The board passed the original policy 3-1 on Dec. 10, 2024, with Desmond voting against. Former Board Chairwoman Nora Vargas, who proposed the policy, has since stepped down from her position.

Now split 2-2 between Republicans and Democrats while a special election is underway to replace Vargas, Desmond is hoping the math might be in his favor to get the nominally nonpartisan board to repeal the policy.

Desmond described the policy -- which received some mild pushback from San Diego County Sheriff Kelly Martinez -- as "a reckless measure that actively shields illegal immigrant criminals from deportation, even after committing horrific crimes."

Vargas, on the other hand, said the policy "is designed to ensure local resources are focused on addressing the county's most urgent needs, while protecting families and promoting community trust."

"Immigration enforcement is a federal responsibility, and our county will not be a tool for policies that hurt our residents," she said in December.

Lawson-Remer earlier said county law enforcement should not be acting as federal agents, which she said erodes trust and leads to fewer people reporting crimes. She said the board letter doesn't prevent the county from giving assistance to federal agencies if there's a suspected violation of the law, but that if federal immigration authorities want county help in apprehending a suspected criminal, they must produce an arrest warrant.

"The policy is pretty limited -- it's not about open borders," she added.

Ian Seruelo, chair of the San Diego Immigrant Rights Consortium, said he applauded the board's decision.

"By ensuring that our local resources are not used to detain and deport San Diegans, the Board is sending a strong message that immigrants are valued and welcomed in our region," Seruelo, who is also chapter leader of the Asian Pacific American Labor Alliance San Diego, said in a statement.

By KAREN WEIL / City News Service