Council discusses reviving sanctuary policy advisory group as residents urge stronger immigration protections

Council member Lopez brought an item asking the City to reconvene a sanctuary-policy advisory group tied to Santa Ana’s 2017 sanctuary ordinance (ordinance NS-2908). Dozens of residents and representatives of community organizations urged the council to act, saying immigrants in Santa Ana feel increased fear and need stronger local protections and services. The council heard many public comments from immigrant-advocacy organizations, students and neighborhood groups; speakers asked the council to reaffirm the city’s sanctuary commitments, revive the advisory group and improve outreach and legal defense services for immigrant residents.

Context and key requests: Lopez framed the item as a response to a continuing pattern of fear and confusion in the immigrant community and said the 2017 ordinance that declared Santa Ana a sanctuary for residents regardless of immigration status anticipated an advisory group to inform policy. Community speakers identified gaps in outreach and legal services — particularly for Southeast Asian communities — and urged the council to reconvene a body that includes community-based organizations and legal experts to advise on sensitive topics including data collection practices and the administration of the city’s Immigration Legal Defense Fund.

City staff and legal considerations: City attorneys and staff reported they could not readily find formal records demonstrating a long-standing, formally constituted sanctuary advisory commission; some participants said informal working groups and advocates had met in the past. The city attorney advised caution: if the council creates a formal commission it will trigger legal requirements such as Brown Act meeting rules and financial-disclosure obligations that could make it difficult for undocumented community members to seek help in a public forum; staff suggested alternatives or careful design to balance transparency and confidentiality.

Police and public-safety note: The Police Department posted a video and the chief reiterated that Santa Ana officers “do not ask about or investigate a person's immigration status,” do not detain people solely for immigration enforcement, and do not participate in federal raids; the chief said the department will continue to collaborate on criminal investigations that affect public safety.

Council response and staff direction: Council members expressed broad support for the city’s sanctuary ordinance and the need to reassure residents. Several members asked the city manager to ensure there is no collaboration with ICE, to improve the city’s “Know Your Rights” information, and to return with a proposal for how to proceed. The council discussed separating any changes to the Immigration Legal Defense Fund (procurement and contract issues) from the advisory-group reconstitution so that each matter can be addressed on its own timeline. The city manager and attorney agreed to review options and report back on a structure that balances confidentiality, community participation and the legal constraints of public commissions.

What the council asked staff to do: Staff was directed to (1) examine whether a formal advisory body existed and, if not, propose an approach for reconvening or creating an advisory group mindful of Brown Act and privacy concerns; (2) prepare recommendations on outreach and representation to ensure the advisory body reflects the city’s immigrant communities (including Southeast Asian communities); and (3) treat the Immigration Legal Defense Fund as a separate procurement/service-delivery issue and provide a report on outreach gaps and potential restructuring options. No final ordinance or policy change was adopted at the meeting; the council asked staff to return with options and recommended next steps.