Residents press Oxnard Council to fund legal defense for immigrants; council asks staff to explore MOU with county public defender

Dozens of residents and community groups urged the Oxnard City Council on Sept. 16 to fund legal defense for undocumented residents and to back state bills and litigation aimed at limiting aggressive immigration enforcement. Scores of speakers — many identifying themselves as organizers, residents and representatives of local immigrant-advocacy groups — called on the city to allocate $1,000,000 for legal aid for affirmative cases and removal defense and to enter or support litigation and state legislation that community speakers said would protect immigrants.

Community appeals and demands: Multiple speakers, including Genevieve Flores Haro (associate director, MyCoP; president, Oxnard Union High School District board of trustees, speaking on her own behalf) and others representing 805-area immigrant coalitions, asked the council to:

- Agendize and allocate $1,000,000 in city funds to support immigration legal defense for Oxnard residents. - Support state legislation referenced by speakers: SB 805 (described by speakers as the "No Vigilantes" act), SB 627 ("No Secret Police"), and AB 1108 (independent medical examinations for deaths in custody), and to enter a common-interest agreement in Newsom v. Trump opposing National Guard deployment for immigration enforcement.

Speakers described the human impact of immigration enforcement raids (including the July 10 workplace operation) and urged immediate action. "We demand that Oxnard demonstrate its commitment to justice and its residents, not just in words but through action," one speaker said. Several speakers, including representatives of the Immigrant Legal Defense Center and 805 UndocuFund, quantified legal needs and urged city funds be paired with state or philanthropic dollars.

Council response and direction: Councilwoman Perla Basuah (district not specified on the record) asked staff to pursue a tangible, accountable approach and directed the city manager to begin discussions with Ventura County about a possible memorandum of understanding to place an attorney in the county public defender’s immigration defense unit ("match one attorney"). She asked staff to return to council with a formal proposal. The city manager agreed to start those discussions.

Why it matters: Speakers cited data about case outcomes with and without counsel (figures cited by speakers: about 10% success for unrepresented immigrants versus roughly 60% with counsel) and argued that local funding for representation could keep families together, reduce downstream social-service costs and leverage outside funding. The council did not adopt an appropriation at the meeting; members agreed to have staff explore the MOU and return with options.

Next steps: City staff were asked to report back on the feasibility of an MOU with Ventura County Public Defender to place or support an immigration defense attorney, with specific program design, accountability and funding options. Several speakers requested that the item be formally agendized for a future meeting so the council could consider a funding allocation.

Attribution and context: The public comment segment included named speakers from local groups (listed below). The remarks were part of the meeting’s public-comment period and did not by themselves create a city appropriation or a formal binding commitment; the council’s instruction to staff is a direction to explore options and return with recommendations.