Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Immigrant Services topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Community presses Richmond to move $1 million immigrant legal services funding after rise in ICE activity
Summary
Speakers urged the council to get the $1 million in legal‑services funding (approved in March) into community organizations quickly, citing recent ICE activity in the region and failed RFP attempts.
Get email alerts on the Immigrant Services topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Dozens of public commenters on Tuesday pressed the Richmond City Council to accelerate distribution of $1 million the council set aside in March to fund immigrant legal services and community awareness, saying the political climate and recent immigration enforcement required immediate action.
Multiple speakers — including organizers with Richmond Progressive Alliance, immigrant advocates and residents — said the city approved the allocation earlier this year but, as of the June 17 meeting, “not a single dollar has reached the community.” Michelle Chan of the Richmond Progressive Alliance said the city must “try harder and move faster” because “this is a crisis.”
Speakers described recent immigration enforcement activity in the Bay Area, including nighttime raids reported elsewhere in Contra Costa County and an incident at a Concord immigration court that advocates said resulted in four people being taken into custody. Several callers said local residents and community organizations were ready to provide services but that the city’s first two procurement efforts for the money (two rounds of RFP in spring/early summer) failed to produce a viable local, funded provider response. Staff told the council that the first RFP was unsuccessful, the second received one non‑local respondent, and staff would ask the council at its July 1 meeting to authorize the city manager to negotiate a contract while the council is on recess.
Speakers urged at least three parallel steps: redistribute grant funds quickly to community legal providers or fiscal partners, launch a public information/know‑your‑rights campaign, and fund capacity building so local organizations can apply for and administer contracts. Several speakers specifically asked for an updated RFP that better matches local needs and for staff to report back before the council leaves for its summer recess.
Councilmember and staff responses at the meeting focused on explaining procurement history: staff said two RFPs had been issued and that staff planned a July 1 item asking the council to authorize the city manager to negotiate and execute a contract while the council is on recess. The council did not vote on the legal services contracts at Tuesday’s meeting.
Public comment also included calls to pair immediate service funding with community outreach, in part to counter misinformation about immigration enforcement and to ensure immigrants know where to find legal help if they need it.

