Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Immigration Enforcement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Sheriff presents Truth Act report; community urges Monterey County to end cooperation with ICE and SCAP
Summary
The Sheriff's Office reported to the board required annual 'Truth Act' metrics on ICE access and transfers; officials said 21 people were released to ICE in 2025 under narrow state exceptions. Dozens of community members urged the county to end all cooperation with ICE including participation in SCAP and called for civilian oversight of the sheriff.
At the board’s Truth Act presentation, sheriff’s office staff described 2025 data and legal constraints under state law: 9,252 jail bookings in 2025, 295 requests for ICE access (including 211 detainer requests), 18 ICE interview requests (9 declined, 6 with counsel present, 3 without counsel), and 21 individuals transferred to ICE (13 after convictions, 8 following probable‑cause hearings). Staff explained those transfers were conducted under the narrow exemptions allowed by the California Values Act (SB 54) and the legislature’s Truth Act reporting requirements.
During the public hearing that followed, hundreds of residents, legal advocates, community organizations and labor and faith groups urged the county to end participation in ICE-related programs and to terminate involvement in the State Criminal Alien Assistance Program (SCAP), which several speakers said shares inmate biographical data with federal agencies in exchange for reimbursement. Commenters described fear among immigrant communities, called for stronger local protections, and demanded a civilian oversight body for the sheriff’s office. Several legal advocacy speakers said cooperation with ICE is discretionary and cited California Department of Justice guidance saying agencies are not required to accept transfer requests.
Sheriff representatives said they would review newly issued California Department of Justice guidance on federal agent investigations and would take public concerns back to staff, and the board agreed to reconvene on a follow-up workshop (tentatively April 14) to receive additional information and questions requested by supervisors. Members of the public asked for clearer, more frequent reporting on volumes, the SCAP program, staff time and fiscal impacts, and whether deputies participate in federal enforcement operations. The board and sheriff committed to further information-sharing and follow-up briefings.
