Chula Vista council adopts resolution on immigration enforcement procedures

The Chula Vista City Council voted Tuesday evening to adopt a resolution affirming the city’s commitment to due process, public safety and what officials called “neighborly responsibility.”

The resolution directs the city manager to implement six measures, including ensuring city policies align with state and federal laws protecting personal privacy and due process, developing a multilingual “Know Your Rights” public education campaign, and establishing procedures for police response to federal immigration enforcement requests.

The resolution also requires future city contracts to prohibit disclosure of personal data in cooperation with discriminatory enforcement actions and restricts access to non-public areas of city facilities for law enforcement activities based on protected personal characteristics unless authorized by statute, judicial warrant or court order.

Councilmember Cesar Fernandez, who introduced the resolution, said it reinforces existing state law, particularly Senate Bill 54, and does not prevent cooperation with federal authorities when proper legal procedures are followed.

“This resolution reinforces that we will not tolerate unlawful or unregulated enforcement actions in our city,” Fernandez said. “It makes clear that we will act to the fullest extent to our authority, using sound policy and accurate information to protect the people who call Chula Vista home.”

Councilmember Michael Inzunza said the resolution aims to ensure residents feel safe accessing city services.

“We don’t want a woman who’s been domestically abused to worry about calling police officers to protect her or save her life,” Inzunza said.

The resolution also directs the city to explore funding partnerships with local nonprofits for crisis relief, case management and legal aid services. The city currently contracts with the Legal Aid Society of San Diego for fair housing and immigration-related services.

Mayor John McCann abstained from voting, citing his position as a naval officer and potential conflict with federal law.

When asked by Inzunza if it was a conflict, City Attorney Marco Verdugo said he was “not aware of the Mayor’s employment conflicting him out of this vote,” but said under city code, an abstention without a qualifying reason is recorded as a vote in favor.