Council advances 'Due Process and Safety' ordinance after hours of public testimony; votes to move to meet-and-confer

The San Diego City Council voted unanimously on Oct. 20 to advance a "Due Process and Safety" ordinance that would prohibit certain uses of city property, personnel, funds and data to facilitate federal or out-of-state enforcement activity targeting people by protected characteristics or protected activities, require public reporting and incident reports, and mandate multilingual signage and contractor compliance.

Sponsor Councilmember Elo Rivera framed the ordinance as a response to an "escalating series of actions" at the federal level and said the measure "establishes clear constitutional safeguards to ensure City of San Diego property, personnel, and funds are not used for unauthorized or discriminatory enforcement activities." Rivera moved the staff recommendation; Councilmember Foster seconded the motion and the council voted 9-0 to advance the ordinance to the meet-and-confer process for labor bargaining and for further legal review.

City staff outlined five principal elements of the ordinance: a reporting requirement for joint law-enforcement task force activity and SDPD interactions with federal or out-of-state agents; codified warrant requirements for access to non-public city areas; restrictions on city data sharing and safeguards for contractor compliance; standardized multilingual notices posted at city facility entries explaining warrant requirements and rights; and specified protections for protected characteristics and protected activities, including reproductive and gender-affirming health care and political expression.

The public-comment record included well over 90 in-person speakers and multiple remote commenters. Community organizations, labor unions, faith leaders, immigrant-rights groups (including the Partnership for the Advancement of New Americans, or PANA), Planned Parenthood, the ACLU, and other advocates urged passage. Speakers described fear among immigrants, reports of aggressive federal arrests, and the need for transparency about data-sharing agreements and the use of automated license-plate readers (ALPRs). "Our community members are afraid to congregate for normal activities and celebrations," said Hamayra Yousefey of PANA. Several speakers urged the council to cancel or place limits on the city's contract with Flock AI for ALPR data, saying license-plate data has been shared with federal agencies.

Sponsor Rivera and other councilmembers acknowledged legal limits and said the ordinance builds on existing state law including the California Values Act (SB 54) and other state protections; the city attorney said the ordinance was drafted to work with surveillance rules and to prohibit most data-sharing except in narrowly defined circumstances. Councilmember Foster asked for clearer operational definitions (for example, what constitutes an "imminent threat to life or public safety") during the meet-and-confer process; the city attorney and staff said they will return with additional detail.

The council's vote sends the ordinance to the city's management team to engage in the meet-and-confer process on mandatory bargaining subjects; councilmembers said they intend to return for final determination after that process.

Next steps: Management team will engage labor bargaining; the council will receive the city attorney's further legal analysis and the ordinance will return for final readings and adoption following meet-and-confer resolution.