Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Immigration Enforcement Local Politics topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
El Cajon public comments call for recall of Councilman Phil Ortiz after councilresolution on ICE cooperation
Summary
Dozens of residents spoke for and against a recall petition targeting Councilman Phil Ortiz following council action related to cooperation with federal immigration enforcement. Speakers cited family separations, public safety and due process; Ortiz defended his vote as public-safety driven.
Dozens of residents filled the El Cajon City Council chambers on April 22 to urge either the recall or continued support of Councilman Phil Ortiz after the council voted earlier this year on a resolution about cooperation with federal immigration authorities.
Speakers ranged from longtime residents and faith leaders to veterans and small-business owners, and the meeting became a forum for conflicting views about public safety and immigrant rights.
The debate centered on the council—s recent vote to work with federal officials on violent criminal noncitizens, a measure supporters described as a public-safety action and opponents described as a betrayal of immigrant families and local sanctuary policies.
"I am absolutely shocked and disgusted that I have to come and address Mayor Wells," resident Ilka Weston said during public comment, criticizing council actions she said had brought Immigration and Customs Enforcement into the city. "These are human beings."
Myrena Branham, who said she had spoken directly to Councilman Ortiz before his earlier vote, told the council, "For Ortiz in his capacity as a member of the El Cajon City Council . . . you have officially been served with the petition for a recall." Several other speakers said they had filed complaints with state or federal offices and urged a recall.
Not all public commentators supported the recall. Tracy Till, speaking as a private citizen, said the effort was "outrageous" and defended Ortiz—s approach to public safety: "Local government is where the rubber meets the road," she said, urging the council to prioritize violent offenders.
Councilman Phil Ortiz addressed the chamber during public comment, calling his vote a public-safety decision and saying he had "nothing to hide." He said the resolution was intended to speak out against SB 54—s limitations and that it did not cover every type of crime. "With this resolution . . . it's solely [my] platform to speak out against SB 54," Ortiz said.
Mayor Bill Wells acknowledged the strong emotions in the room and thanked speakers, and multiple residents said the debate had driven them to organize, collect signatures and deliver petitions.
Why it matters: The public comment session shows sharp local division over immigration enforcement policy and elected officials' roles in coordinating with federal authorities. Advocates for the recall argued the council action had immediate, harmful effects on families and community trust; supporters called the move necessary to protect public safety.
The council did not take formal action on the recall petition during the meeting. City staff recorded the number of public-comment speaker cards early in the session as 19; the period extended into a broad set of remarks that the mayor and Councilman Ortiz addressed directly. Several speakers said they have filed complaints with state or federal agencies and were organizing further civic action.
The council—s formal agenda moved on after public comment to public hearings and ordinance introductions, indicating no immediate council vote on the recall petition itself.
Looking ahead: Opponents said they would continue petition and legal paths to challenge Ortiz; supporters said they would continue to back him as a public-safety advocate. The dispute is likely to shape council politics and public engagement in El Cajon in the coming months.
