Oakland police commission ad hoc fast‑tracks review of OPD immigration policy after community raises escort concerns

The Oakland Police Commission’s immigration ad hoc convened a first working session to review the Oakland Police Department’s draft Department General Order 10 (DGO‑10) and related city ordinance language, with community members urging clear rules for how officers should interact with federal immigration authorities and the commission setting a tight schedule to produce recommendations.

Chair Garcia Cuesta, who opened the session, said the panel would move faster than the typical 120‑day review timeline to synthesize community input and present recommendations. "We’re really gonna be moving fast through this process," she said, explaining the commission’s goal to reconcile department and community priorities.

Deputy Chief Asmus of the Oakland Police Department framed OPD’s position, saying the department does not assist U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement in civil immigration operations and will only become involved where a criminal matter is implicated. "We are not going to assist ICE in any of their civil or immigration or any of their other things," Asmus said, adding that department policy and federal law limit local agency actions.

Commissioner Griot cautioned the ad hoc against drafting policy that would place officers in a legally untenable position. He urged the group to focus on measures the city can enforce—such as clarifying responses to judicial warrants—while avoiding language that could force officers to violate city policy or federal law.

Community members and advocacy groups pressed for more operational clarity. Anne Jenks of the Coalition for Police Accountability said residents want answers on how OPD will identify federal agents in the field, and what crowd‑control instructions officers will receive when federal agencies conduct enforcement actions in Oakland. "If somebody comes and they are wearing nothing and they tell me they're a federal agent, will OPD seek to identify them?" Jenks asked.

Alba Hernandez of Faith in Action East Bay and other community members recounted recent reports of ICE presence at Eastmont Mall and asked whether OPD had escorted or otherwise aided those federal operations. Millie Cleveland asked who would follow up to determine why officers who assisted federal agents believed their actions complied with sanctuary policy.

Attorney Jim Wood, who said he drafted a city ordinance that reached a first reading at the city council, argued the ordinance should be used as a baseline for commission policy because, he said, it mirrors San Francisco’s ordinance that survived federal court challenges. "With an ordinance, this is enforceable," Wood said, urging explicit accountability provisions requiring written reports to the public safety committee if OPD participates in immigration operations.

Inspector General Zirvan Malouf told the ad hoc his office reviewed OPD’s draft and compared it with practices in 13 California agencies and state laws, including SB 54, the Trust Act and the Truth Act. Malouf said his office identified six policy gaps where DGO‑10 does not yet align with state law or best practices and offered to circulate those recommendations to the panel in advance of follow‑up meetings.

Panelists agreed on short next steps: the inspector general will distribute his recommendations to staff for distribution, the ad hoc will circulate a doodle poll to schedule at least two meetings in the coming weeks, and the commission plans to agendize any proposed recommendations for the July 23 commission meeting. Chair Garcia Cuesta and Commissioner Griot asked participants and community partners to respond promptly to scheduling requests so the group can refine policy language and address implementation questions.

The ad hoc did not take formal votes in the session; members said the group will use subsequent meetings to draft specific policy language and accountability mechanisms informed by the inspector general’s memo and community input. Staff will compile attendee lists and meeting notes and circulate them to panelists. The panel expects to reconvene before the July 23 deadline.