Moreno Valley council supports Riverside Countywelcoming resolution for immigrants; vote 4-1

The Moreno Valley City Council voted 4-1 on March 4 to approve a resolution expressing support for Riverside Countyresolution that affirms the county as "vibrant, compassionate and welcoming for all law‑abiding immigrants and refugees." The item (I-6 on the agenda) followed extensive public comment from local advocates and residents urging the council to adopt stronger protections and supports for immigrant residents.

Supporters who addressed the council described immigrants as essential to Moreno Valleycommunity and urged the council to follow the county's lead. "By supporting this resolution, the Moreno Valley City Council is taking a stand in favor of dignity and inclusivity for all residents," said Natalia Saka, regional policy advocate for the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights (CHERLA). Gabriela Perez, executive director of the Inland Empire Latino Lawyers Association, told the council she wants city language that is "very personal" and actionable so residents understand what the resolution means in practice.

Council discussion focused on wording and scope. Staff explained the resolution sent as an exhibit to the council mirrors language in the Riverside County measure; some language in the county document references actions by county departments, including the sheriff, which the city cannot directly order. Council member Gonzales asked why the item was drafted as a statement of support for the county resolution rather than a standalone Moreno Valley resolution modeled on the county text. City Manager Brian Mohan said the county text includes instructions tied to county departments, so staff used the county resolution as an exhibit while noting limits on the city's authority to direct the sheriff.

Council member Bernard, who led earlier efforts to bring an immigration-related item to the council, said she would prefer a fuller, city‑specific resolution and urged staff to return with revised language that could be applied to Moreno Valley. Council member Delgado, who voted no, said he supports immigrants but emphasized adherence to law: "I come from a family of immigrants and I am not anti immigrant. I am pro law," he said during deliberations.

The final roll call on the resolution was: Mayor Pro Tem Vaca Santa Cruz (mover) and Council member Bernard (second) — motion carried with Mayor Cabrera, Mayor Pro Tem Vaca Santa Cruz, Council member Gonzales and Council member Bernard voting yes; Council member Delgado voted no. The council also instructed staff and Council offices to improve the process for drafting council-initiated resolutions so future items can be worked through with staff before they return to the dais for a final vote.

The vote came after roughly 90 minutes of public comment on the item. Speakers included representatives from CHERLA, the Inland Coalition for Immigrant Justice, local legal aid groups and multiple Moreno Valley residents and students who said passage would help build trust between immigrant communities and local government and public safety officials. Several speakers also urged the council to consider creating a legal-defense fund to help immigrants secure representation in immigration proceedings.

Other actions during the meeting relevant to community groups: the council unanimously approved its consent calendars (with one item pulled for separate vote) and amended an appointment to the Southern California Association of Governments; it also directed staff to add a Homekey Plus discussion to the homeless ad hoc committee agenda and asked staff to prepare an ordinance review and public‑hearing report on shopping-center security requirements (both items will return to the council for further deliberation). Those items were procedural and do not change city policy until staff returns with specific proposals.

The resolution adopted on March 4 is styled as the City of Moreno Valley supporting Riverside County's action rather than an entirely original city resolution; several council members said they want more city‑specific language on a future draft. Staff said it will return with follow-up language and a proposed internal policy to clarify future council-initiated drafts and staff collaboration.

—

Votes and next steps: the immigration resolution (I-6) passed 4-1. Staff will prepare any requested city‑specific language and return the item to the council for further consideration. The homeless Homekey Plus discussion will be placed on the homeless ad hoc committee agenda; staff will prepare details and coordinate with the county and possible partners. A staff report and draft ordinance on shopping-center security requirements will be prepared for public hearing and council consideration.