Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Immigration Detention topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Adelanto residents press council to cut ties with GEO-operated ICE processing center
Summary
Dozens of residents urged the Adelanto City Council to end any association with the Adelanto ICE Processing Center and the GEO Group, calling for withdrawal of permits, transparency about past communications, and a non-cooperation ordinance; council members agreed to place related items on future agendas and to pursue a meeting with facility officials.
Dozens of residents used the City Council public-comment period on June 11 to demand the city end its association with the Adelanto ICE Processing Center and GEO Group and to block future cooperation with federal immigration enforcement.
Speakers described alleged abuses inside the facility and urged specific steps: withdrawing any conditional-use permit that allows the center to operate, refusing future agreements with private detention companies, and passing a local non-cooperation ordinance to bar city support for ICE operations. “This facility has long been documented as a site of abuse, medical neglect, and unjust detention,” said Megan Ruiz, identifying herself as a concerned resident, and she asked the council to “pass a non-cooperation ordinance that blocks city services to support ICE.”
Other commenters cited individual cases and broader allegations. An organizer with the Shutdown Adelanto Coalition said the facility’s maximum capacity is 1,940 people and claimed the GEO Group received payments per detainee and significant revenue to the city; another speaker alleged detainee deaths and criticized past treatment during COVID, including reports that disinfectant was sprayed on people. Public commenters asked the council to make public all communications between the city and ICE or GEO since 2019.
Council members acknowledged the concerns and directed staff to follow up. Councilwoman Evans asked that a non-cooperation ordinance be placed on a future council agenda. Mayor Gabriel Reyes asked the city manager to try to set a meeting with the facility’s current officials or warden so councilmembers and staff can get questions answered and better understand access and policies; he said residents have the right to have their questions addressed professionally. City Manager Jesse Flores (staff report earlier in the meeting) had said staff would pursue outreach as appropriate.
The council did not vote on an ordinance or withdraw any permits during the meeting; instead, members discussed next steps and requested staff work and potential agenda items. Several public speakers said they planned further advocacy and asked council members to take concrete action at an upcoming meeting.
What’s next: Councilwoman Evans formally requested the non-cooperation ordinance be added to a future agenda; the council asked the city manager to arrange briefings with facility representatives and to return to council with options for the proposed ordinance or other formal measures.
