San Rafael police outline nonparticipation in federal immigration enforcement under SB 54

San Rafael Police Captain Roy Leon told the Police Advisory and Accountability Committee on Feb. 19 that the department will limit cooperation with federal immigration authorities consistent with Senate Bill 54, also called the California Values Act, and with the San Rafael Police DepartmentPolicy 4.13.

"The primary purpose of Senate Bill 54 is to limit the involvement of state and local agencies in federal immigration enforcement with the goal of protecting immigrant communities," Captain Roy Leon said, outlining the law's effective date (Jan. 1, 2018) and the department policy that officers should not investigate, interrogate, detain or arrest people for civil immigration violations.

The department's written policy, Leon said, directs officers not to collect or share information about a person's immigration status and not to transfer people into ICE custody for deportation purposes except where state law allows exceptions for certain criminal convictions or active criminal investigations into violent crimes. "It is the policy of the San Rafael Police Department that all members make a personal and professional commitment to equitably enforce the law and to provide equal service to the public," Leon said.

Why it matters: Committee members and many community speakers said they are anxious after recent national developments and want clear, usable guidance about where and how to get official information. Speakers pressed the department on whether routine traffic citations or court processes could expose people to immigration checks, how often federal immigration investigators are in San Rafael, and whether new camera and license-plate systems can be accessed by federal agencies.

Key details from the presentation and Q&A

- Citations vs. booking: Department staff said routine citations ("cite and release") generally do not produce booking records that the police department would directly provide to federal immigration authorities. A booking to jail and a submission to the district attorney can create public booking-log entries that are accessible via public records. Captain Leon said the department does not itself provide immigration authorities with individuals' personal information except as publicly available.

- ICE presence: San Rafael staff said federal immigration investigators sometimes notify the city when they are working in the jurisdiction. The department reported being notified seven times for the entire year of 2024 and about four times so far this year; staff characterized most recent notifications as surveillance activity around specific investigations and not as broad sweeps.

- U visas: The department said it maintains records of law-enforcement certifications for U nonimmigrant status ("U visas"). Over roughly the past five years, staff reported receiving about 384 U-visa requests and denying 12, and they explained that the police role is to verify victim status on the DHS form; final U-visa decisions are made by federal authorities.

- Automated license-plate readers and surveillance: Staff described two systems in use. A long-standing vendor (Vigilant) provides mobile readers; a newer system (Flock) has fixed cameras and a 30-day retention policy. The department stated it does not share license-plate reader data with federal immigration agencies and that fixed cameras are deployed at locations identified from crime data. Staff said the system records a plate at a time-and-place but does not itself "triangulate" a vehicle continuously across every camera for routine queries; they also promised an annual public report on plate-reader inquiries.

Community concerns and department responses

Residents and community organizations pressed the committee for plain-language materials and broader outreach. Several speakers asked whether police would notify the public if federal agents were in town to conduct non-case-specific enforcement. Staff said they would seek to communicate changes and could use social media, town halls and the committee's channels; they also said the city-level legal and policy response would depend on state and federal law and advice from the city attorney.

Other public concerns included students' anxiety over whether federal agents might appear at San Rafael High School and rumors that federal agents were using DUI checkpoints to detain people. Department staff rejected that claim and said a recent DUI checkpoint involved only state-funded traffic enforcement and no federal participation.

What changed and what remains the same

Staff framed the department's approach as consistent with SB 54 and described a commitment to keep community-facing practices aligned with that policy. They said they will continue to follow state law, to consult legal counsel as laws evolve, and to inform the public if the legal landscape or departmental obligations change.

Ending: The committee asked staff to produce concise, multilingual materials that the public can distribute (flyers, a one-page FAQ and web links), to post the department's presentation and to explore targeted outreach to high schools and community centers. Committee members and residents urged the department to continue regular communication about notifications from federal agencies and about what information is and is not shared.

Votes at a glance: The committee approved minutes for the Jan. 11 special meeting and the Jan. 15 regular meeting by roll-call vote during the meeting; the motion carried and was recorded as approved.