Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Immigration Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Students and community members press Santa Maria council for 2‑mile immigration "safe zones"; council says it lacks authority, discusses state bills
Summary
Dozens of students and community members urged the Santa Maria City Council on Feb. 18 to create a two‑mile buffer around schools, parks, hospitals and houses of worship to prevent immigration enforcement.
Get email alerts on the Immigration Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Dozens of students and community members urged the Santa Maria City Council on Feb. 18 to create a two‑mile buffer around schools, parks, hospitals and houses of worship to prevent immigration enforcement in those areas.
The request drew repeated public testimony during the meeting’s public‑comment period and prompted a multi‑part response from city officials who stressed the city’s limited legal authority and suggested seeking state or federal remedies.
Why it matters: Petitioners said the proposed buffer would reduce fear among immigrant families who they said are deterred from attending school, visiting parks and seeking medical care. City leaders said they cannot unilaterally block federal enforcement inside city limits but signaled support for pursuing state‑level protections.
Students and community speakers described personal and family fear of immigration enforcement. Jesus Romero, a student who identified himself as participating in a multi‑hour march to City Hall, said the demonstration was meant to protect his grandparents and other families “who endure an ever growing fear of losing the home they created.” Romero told the council, “Our nation is built on immigration, not deportation.”
Multiple student speakers asked the council to adopt a formal two‑mile restriction around “sensitive locations.” Speakers described long workdays, fear of separation from family and the emotional impact on children who attend local schools.
City response and legal limits Alice Patino, mayor of the City of Santa Maria, told speakers the city values the trust of all residents and wants people to feel safe interacting with city employees. Patino said the city will not ask about immigration status when providing police services and stated that the Santa Maria Police Department does not enforce federal immigration law or take part in immigration enforcement operations.
City Attorney Mr. Watson then outlined legal constraints, citing the U.S. Constitution—s supremacy clause and state law limitations. Watson said the city does not have authority to bar federal agents, including Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), from conducting actions within city limits and advised petitioners to seek relief from the state and from federal representatives.
Councilmembers discussed supporting pending state legislation that would restrict immigration enforcement in certain settings. Councilmember Sotto and others said they would like the city to send letters of support for Senate Bill 48 and Senate Bill 56, both described during the meeting as pending state measures that address enforcement at schools and other sensitive locations. No formal council vote on sending letters was recorded during the meeting.
What the city said it can do Council and staff repeatedly emphasized that the city will continue to provide police services without inquiring into immigration status and encouraged residents to report victimization regardless of status. City officials suggested that the correct venue for the requested prohibition would be the state legislature or the federal delegation, and they encouraged petitioners to press state lawmakers to act.
The public‑comment period for the Feb. 18 meeting included 16 callers or in‑person speakers on this topic; many identified themselves as high‑school students and young residents of Santa Maria.
Looking ahead Council discussion ended without a formal vote on an official city policy to create local “safe zones,” though several councilmembers expressed interest in supporting state legislation that could strengthen protections at schools. City staff and attorneys said they would provide further information about the state bills and the legal limits on local action.
Ending note: The speakers asked for an immediate local protective measure; the council instead advised pursuing state legislation and reiterated that local police will not ask about immigration status when providing services.

