Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Comment Immigration topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents urge Rancho Cucamonga to challenge courthouse immigration actions and end Flock surveillance contract
Summary
Multiple residents told the council that immigration enforcement operations and unmarked vehicles at the courthouse have intimidated people and interfered with access to justice; speakers asked the city to bar use of city property by immigration agents, reinstate virtual hearing options and end the Flock contract.
A string of public commenters at the March 18 Rancho Cucamonga council meeting urged city leaders to take a public stance against immigration enforcement activity near the local courthouse and to end the city's contract with surveillance vendor Flock.
"We see masked goons waiting in the courthouse parking lot several days a week, using cars with illegally dark tinting...refusing to show identification," Shirley Moon told the council, describing repeated incidents in and around the courthouse and saying the activity had compromised due process for people attending court.
Jennifer Smith said, "Today alone, there were 9 ICE vehicles in this parking lot...At our worst, we have 6 people a day being disappeared by masked men," and urged the council to reinstate virtual options for court hearings and to prohibit immigration agents from using courthouse or state property.
Ulysses Cavallo, who said he has lived in Rancho Cucamonga since 2001, called for a formal city resolution: "I'm asking this council to take a clear and public position that our city's institutions, our libraries, our parks, our courthouses should be safe spaces for all community members." He asked the council to communicate concerns to county and federal partners and to explore a resolution affirming the city's commitment to due process.
Speakers also criticized local use of Flock license‑plate cameras and asked the city to cancel Flock contracts, alleging county use of similar systems for protest monitoring. Commenters said they will continue to return to council meetings until the city acts.
The mayor closed the public‑comment period and said staff would continue outreach and community meetings; the city attorney later noted that the Rancho Cucamonga courthouse is operated by the Superior Court of San Bernardino and owned by the state, a clarification about jurisdiction that several speakers had requested during comments.
