Garden Grove council to return revised "due process" resolution after hours of public testimony

The Garden Grove City Council voted 5–1–1 on Oct. 28 to return a revised draft of a resolution intended to promote access to "know your rights" information and related local resources for residents affected by immigration enforcement. Councilmember Ariana Aristegui, who introduced the measure as a discussion item, described the draft as "a starting point for conversation" aimed at giving residents and local organizations clearer, centralized information.

The decision followed nearly two hours of public comment. Supporters, including representatives of local immigrant-advocacy groups, faith organizations and student organizers, urged the council to move quickly to make legal and emergency resources available to residents they said have been living in fear of enforcement actions. "We urge you to vote yes to move forward with agenda item number 19," said Alia Yousefey, Senior Policy and Advocacy Manager at CAIR Greater LA.

Opponents argued the draft as written asked the city to undertake work that could require staff time and budget and might raise legal questions. "The resolution is written with $0 amount on it," said resident Linda Zamora, who urged the council to avoid promising unfunded programs. Former city staffer and longtime resident John Ramirez said many of the services identified already exist through county and nonprofit channels and urged the council to prioritize core municipal responsibilities.

Council debate focused on two practical questions: what specific, low-cost steps the city can take now (for example, a single web page of vetted links and a "know your rights" handout), and whether directing staff to assemble and post those resources would expose the city to legal or funding risk. Several councilmembers said they wanted clearer language that would avoid asking staff to create new ongoing programs or make unfunded commitments. Councilmember Joe Dovin led a line-by-line read of the draft and proposed deletions of material he called duplicative; Mayor Klompenstein, while sympathetic to community concern, sought assurances from the city attorney about legal risk.

In the motion that carried, the council directed staff to return a revised draft resolution that incorporates edits suggested during discussion, and to provide the city attorney's legal review of any steps that could materially affect funding or legal exposure. The motion passed by a 5 yes, 1 no, 1 abstention margin (details below). Councilmembers emphasized that the vote scheduled a future formal action rather than adopting substantive policy that night.

What the draft would have done (as discussed): centralize links to local legal aid and crisis supports on the city's website; prepare a printable "know your rights" packet for community partners; coordinate with nonprofit and school-district partners to share information; and encourage—but not fund—community collaboration on mutual aid and legal support.

What happens next: staff will prepare a revised draft and a memo from the city attorney addressing legal and fiscal constraints. The revised item will return to the council as an action item for a future meeting; the council did not adopt any new budget at this meeting.

A note on public input: more than 60 speakers signed up for oral communications and a large share addressed the draft resolution. Speakers reflected a wide range of views: faith leaders, immigrant-rights organizers, students, small-business owners and longtime residents, some urging immediate symbolic action and others urging caution about legal and budgetary consequences.

Votes and next steps: The motion to return the resolution for formal consideration carried 5–1–1. The council requested that staff and the city attorney provide clear legal language and budget notes alongside the revised draft before another vote.

Ending note: Councilmembers said they expect the next version to be narrower and more explicit about staff responsibilities and fiscal impact, and to focus first on information-sharing steps that require little or no new funding.