[0:01] Okay, that's fine. We
[0:05] will see how it goes in an hour. Alright, ladies and gentlemen, welcome to the oklahoma city council
[0:09] meeting. The meeting is now called to order, and I'd like to ask our city clerk to please call
[0:13] the roll. Mr. Mayor, we need to formally adjourn from the two o'clock special meeting.
[0:18] oh, you're right. Okay. Sorry. And we can move to the three. You bear with
[0:22] me. We've gotta, I've gotta read this statement.
[0:26] uh, first off, um, I ask our city attorney to
[0:31] report on the closed session.
[0:37] thank you, mayor city councilman. Closed session at the end of the special meeting this, this
[0:41] afternoon on conference with legal counsel on anticipated litigation, uh,
[0:45] significant exposure litigation, and, uh, it gave
[0:49] direction, direction to the city's legal counsel. Thank
[0:54] you. Um, this brings us to adjournment, the joint special meeting of the oklahoma city council
[0:58] and el cajon housing authority held. This 11th day of
[1:02] february, 2025 is adjourned. And welcome
[1:06] to the elcon city council meeting. This meeting is called to order and I'd like to ask our city clerk
[1:10] to please call the roll. All council members are present. Thank
[1:14] you very much. Alright.
[1:20] would you please stand with me for the pledge of allegiance and then remain standing afterwards.
[1:24] for a brief moment of silence,
[1:30] I pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america
[1:35] and to the republic for which it stands, one nation
[1:39] under god, invis, and liberty and justice for
[1:43] all.
[1:53] thank you.
[1:57] the city clerk posted orders of adjournment of the january 28th, 2025 meeting
[2:02] and the agenda of the february 11th, 2025 meeting in accordance with state law,
[2:06] city council and housing authority policy. Once again, I'd like to invite members
[2:10] of the public to attend the 2025 state of the city address. The event will
[2:14] be held on tuesday, february 18th, 2025 at 6:00 pm at the ronald reagan
[2:18] community center, located at 1 95 east douglas avenue. Join
[2:22] us as we reflect on the accomplishments of the past year and share what
[2:26] is coming into your ahead. We have
[2:30] no presentations on today's agenda. Staff, do you have any agenda changes
[2:35] mr. Mayor? No changes. Counsel, any agenda changes?
[2:39] I see none. That brings us to consent items, consent items and routine
[2:43] matters and enacted by one motion according to the recommendation listed below
[2:47] with the concurrence of the city council, council member or person in attendance may
[2:51] request discussion of a consent item at this time. Council members, do you wish to
[2:56] pull any of the consent items? Seeing none, staff?
[3:01] no, sir. Are there any speaker cards for consent items? Sir? We have one
[3:05] speaker card from truth.
[3:17] you have to tell him. Hi. Truth. Hi there. I didn't want you guys to
[3:21] yep. I saw. No, I want, I want, um, I wanna hear everything
[3:25] you have to say. Go ahead. I'll give you a few more seconds. Okay. Mike is on and no one is distracted.
[3:29] that means we can begin. So the minutes claim. I spoke in opposition
[3:33] to item nine and maybe it sounded that way to some people.
[3:38] I think it did. Uh, but I was actually in support and I do want the record
[3:42] to reflect that I could even accept neutral if you wanna compromise.
[3:46] I was only in opposition to racism and lies not toward
[3:50] that item. Also, amy riker's name ends in
[3:54] the letter t not a d. Also important. Thank you, . Thank you very much.
[3:59] amy. We apologize . Okay then. Um,
[4:03] I'd like to make a motion then to approve the consent items. Second, please vote.
[4:11] motion carries by unanimous vote.
[4:16] alright, that brings us to public comment. We're
[4:21] now at public comment. At this time, any person may address a matter within the jurisdiction
[4:25] of the city council housing authority successor agency to the el cajon redevelopment
[4:29] agency that is not on the agenda. Comments ran into items on today's
[4:33] agenda already be taken at the time that the item is heard. State law prohibits discussion
[4:37] or action on items not on the agenda. However, city council and housing authority members
[4:42] may briefly respond to statements or questions, and an item may be
[4:46] placed on a future agenda. Andrew, do we have any speaker cards for public comment? Yes,
[4:50] sir. We have three of them. The first one is from truth.
[5:04] okay. First, I wanna thank the police for keeping everyone safe. During the last meeting, there
[5:08] were stationed all around the premises, so I didn't have to worry about, uh, my way
[5:12] out. Every, every city needs this protocol and my ideas for meeting improvements.
[5:17] bill, I appreciate how questions are often answered, but please end the back and
[5:21] forth discussion during people's comment. Time it's unproductive and causes conflicts. Save
[5:25] your guys' comments for after another issue. During the last meeting,
[5:30] so many people had to fight to be heard, and that is not okay. The individual consistent
[5:34] disruptor should have been removed from the chamber to keep order and deter further misbehaviors.
[5:39] I encourage removal for those who refuse to be respectful while people speak. I don't care what
[5:43] your belief is. Also, please always call three speakers names
[5:47] at a time so people know to be ready. And again, the racial
[5:51] stereotypes by steve and gary need to end. There was even a ridiculous
[5:55] lie about so-called brown people feeling scared to shop in el
[6:00] cajon. So I brought my back. I'm not scared today and I'm not gonna be scared no
[6:04] matter who the president is. So cease and desist on the fear-mongering hateful
[6:08] rhetoric in the city's code of ethics and or conduct, there needs to be a
[6:13] specific policy against racial stereotyping. Now I'm gonna talk about a
[6:17] few activist groups that have attended recent council meetings. The national
[6:21] day labor network who had a member threaten the city with lawsuits is a well-funded
[6:25] la based organization that works with the political union, a-f-l-c-I-o,
[6:29] and have an organizing method based on communist palo uh,
[6:33] fires ideas. The national daily labor network praises sanctuary
[6:37] policies on their website. And they have a workforce initiative, which includes the partner
[6:41] catholic charities, who many would deem to be a big time profiteer off the
[6:46] illegal immigration industrial complex. There was the sand diego organizing
[6:50] project who pushed for every tax paying resident of the county, a foot, a $5 million
[6:54] annual lawyer bill only for those facing deportations. Ironically,
[6:58] under the county government accountability part of their website, they featured disgraced
[7:03] former county supervisors, nathan fletcher and nora vargas. And there was the partnership
[7:07] for new americans. Panna, who in 2021 had members
[7:11] actively advocating for carving el cajon out of district two, as well as
[7:15] segregating the chaldean community and rancho san diego away from el cajon
[7:20] and latinos and axion, who organized the mexican senate president's visit to el
[7:25] cajon of all cities in america, yet according to a, b, c
[7:29] 10, a, b, c, 10 news, latinos and acumen's. Very first meeting was after the
[7:33] last council meeting. Many of these people also spotted in downtown san diego.
[7:37] at the protest there did they carpool magically, clockwork
[7:41] protest and riots also popped up in national city, escondido, oceanside,
[7:45] vista, and outside of san diego, such as in la riverside, dallas,
[7:49] arkansas, missouri, and georgia. But somebody paid for that switch to be turned
[7:54] on. The question is who? Because no movement suddenly gets a nationwide
[7:58] flyer title and plan of operation without being planned well in advance with
[8:02] a lot of money, and it's all been based and disinformation. Thank
[8:06] you. Thank you.
[8:11] brenda hammond,
[8:16] you're getting brenda, can you ask the next person? Oh, I'll come up. Brenda.
[8:29] can't do it.
[8:41] come.
[8:45] I'm missing a blue one. Well, blue is not that important to me anyway. Oh,
[8:49] sorry. . Hi, brenda. Go ahead. Um, hi.
[8:54] hi, graham. Mr. Mitchell. Um, I, I wanna say
[8:58] I grew up with all kinds of people in east county and yes, that includes el cajon.
[9:03] I learned my teenage life lessons in el cajon. I
[9:07] I knew a lesbian couple that grew to love each other since they were
[9:11] teenagers. Um, they started a house cleaning business.
[9:16] and as adults over the years became very successful. They later
[9:20] married when I went, when I went through my divorce, they
[9:24] asked me to come to their new year's eve party and I, and, um, at their house in
[9:28] la mesa. I was hesitant but curious. So I showed
[9:32] up and I stood at the open door and I peered in their festive house.
[9:37] everyone was having fun talking, dancing, a little drinking. They weren't having an
[9:41] orgy. Um, I smiled and turned to leave. Well, one of my
[9:45] girls, as I called them all these years, as I, as I,
[9:50] um, as I turned to go away, as I
[9:54] turned to leave, they turned off the music and said, everybody, this is brenda.
[9:59] she likes the oscar meyer. So show her some respect.
[10:03] I was handed a blue margarita, which was really good, and I stayed about an hour
[10:07] and I had a great time. My point is, we all need to be to stop judging
[10:11] each other for whatever sexual preference, religion, um,
[10:16] especially race. Thank you. Thank you,
[10:20] berta. The last speaker is allegedly
[10:25] audra. Hi ara. Welcome.
[10:30] hey, bill, how you doing? Having fun. All right. It's always fun, right?
[10:34] life is interesting. So I wanted to bring up some things that happened at the last meeting,
[10:39] and this has to do with you, michelle. I don't think that you handled,
[10:43] uh, the aftermath of the meeting very well.
[10:48] I think that you were very outrageous, um, absurd. And you
[10:52] should have been more composed when talking to your own constituents. I
[10:56] actually had to stand in between you because it got so, um,
[11:01] seemingly aggressive and out of control. And it's very sad
[11:05] to see that you can make excuses. Like, you know, you're tired, you're hungry, you're on
[11:09] menopause, you're having menopause issues. Um, I think that
[11:13] if you can't handle some, those are her own words. Those
[11:17] are her own words. So if that's something that you can't handle
[11:21] any kind of questioning by somebody who is very calm,
[11:26] and you said that, that's why you are not running again, that's exactly why you
[11:30] shouldn't be in that seat, is because you can't handle the pressure of
[11:34] being a public official and being able to talk to your own constituents in a calm
[11:39] manner. And it's sad because you didn't like that I,
[11:43] I had to put my arm in because it was like, to the point where I wasn't sure
[11:47] if there was gonna be some kind of physical altercation, not just verbal.
[11:53] and if you can't take a moment and collect and
[11:57] compose yourself, then it's concerning to see that you are up in
[12:01] a seat that you're gonna make, be making decisions on behalf of people.
[12:06] if you can't calmly think about what you're doing, take a step back and say,
[12:10] you know what? I'm a public official. I need to maybe calm myself down
[12:14] instead of making excuses as to why that was happening, because
[12:18] it doesn't reflect well on the board. And it's very scary to
[12:23] think about that. You make excuses as opposed to owning your own actions
[12:27] and saying, you know what? I, I probably should have been more calm, because
[12:31] we can all do that. But if you, if that is, is something that
[12:36] you're not capable of, then if you can't run again, you
[12:40] may as well resign from being in that seat, because that would show that you're not
[12:44] capable of being able to take the pressures of the job.
[12:49] you should be the ones calming others down, not people having to come and
[12:53] calm you down. And granted, yes, it's a very intense and
[12:57] high, uh, energy subject, but your job
[13:01] isn't to attack the public and attack your own constituents.
[13:07] so I would hope that you can reflect on that and make better
[13:12] decisions moving forward, especially tonight that we're about to experience
[13:16] the same type of pressures. I would hope that you
[13:20] can be calm, collected, and composed, and not use excuses as to
[13:24] why you can't do that. And that will show the people why they
[13:28] should have trust in you and not prove to them why they shouldn't.
[13:33] so, I'm coming to you from a place of love. I'm not coming to you from a place of hate.
[13:38] okay? Thank you very much. So, just understand that
[13:43] I, ladies and gentlemen, listen, I'm, I'm looking forward
[13:47] to spirit of the debate tonight, but I'm gonna tell you something, I'm not gonna, I'm
[13:51] not gonna allow the disruptions that you brought last time to be brought again this time.
[13:55] this could be a real long night. If, if, if you can't behave, I'll, I'll
[14:00] call time outs. We'll go away for a while. We'll come back. If you wanna
[14:04] stay here until two or three in the morning, we can do that. Why don't we just act like adults
[14:08] and be respectful of all people? Alright.
[14:18] uh, we have no written communications and no public hearings on today's agenda.
[14:23] we have two administrative reports on today's agenda. Item 10 is the interviews for
[14:27] city commissions. We have the incumbents for the personnel commission and the planning
[14:31] commission here this afternoon. Gentlemen, each of you have three minutes to share with us. The
[14:35] council may ask follow up questions if necessary before we continue. Angela, do we have any
[14:39] speaker cards for this item? We do not have any speaker cards. Okay. Who's
[14:43] our first applicant? Uh, for the personnel commission, we have mr.
[14:47] kurt brower, who's our incumbent.
[14:58] mr. Brower, thank
[15:02] you for coming today. Thank you, sir. Um, hello mayor.
[15:07] uh, city council staff. Um, I'm here this evening, uh, looking
[15:11] for reappointment, uh, personnel commission for another four years.
[15:15] um, I know, I believe you have my application, I have a copy of it. Also,
[15:20] I know that you have a very busy agenda tonight, so I'm willing to make it
[15:24] as short as possible, but I'll ask, uh, answer all your questions.
[15:29] thank you, mr. Breer. Any questions for mr. Breer? Um, you've
[15:33] done a great job. I really appreciate all that you've done. I will make this,
[15:37] uh, quick. He's our only applicant. Uh, I'd like to, um,
[15:42] I'd like to appoint him to the post. I make that a motion. If somebody would second,
[15:47] second, please vote.
[15:53] motion carries by unanimous vote. Thanks a lot. And mr. Brown, I wanna thank you
[15:57] for serving your community. I, I, there's no pay involved in this and there's
[16:02] a lot of hours involved in preparing for your, your meetings and,
[16:06] um, it's very selfless and I appreciate what you do for us. Thank
[16:10] you, sir, for your comments. I appreciate it. It's been a good experience. Good. I'm glad it has been. Thank
[16:14] you. Thank you
[16:20] mayor. The applicant for the planning commission is mr. Darren
[16:25] ross. He is not in attendance, but again, he submitted his application
[16:29] for reappointment. Okay. And he's our, he's our only
[16:33] applicant, right? Yeah. Um, is there any,
[16:37] uh, speaker cards for mr. Moroz?
[16:42] uh, pardon. Could, could you repeat that please? Any speaker cards in his appointment?
[16:47] uh, no speaker cards. Alright. I, since he's our only applicant and darren has
[16:51] been a excellent, hardworking member of the planning commission for
[16:55] some 15 years now, uh, I'd like to appoint him again.
[16:59] I'd like to make that a motion. If second, please vote.
[17:06] motion carries by a unanimous vote. Okay.
[17:11] um, you're not gonna, you're not gonna give the oath of office?
[17:15] no, no, sir. They're incumbents. We don't need to do that again. Fantastic, thank you. The last administrative
[17:20] report, item 11 is an update on homeless programs and services. And
[17:24] I'd like our ask to ask our staff to tell us about this. Thank you, mr. Mayor, members of the
[17:28] council, if we can get the, the presentation up. Um, for the last
[17:32] five years, uh, the city has been presenting a semi-annual report about
[17:36] where we're at on the homelessness. Uh, all of our different programs. As you know, we run
[17:40] many different programs and, uh, uh, yani brito will provide the
[17:44] majority of the report, but I just wanted to kind of start out with giving a little bit of preface of, of where
[17:48] we're at today. So this report will really, it
[17:52] includes data going back several years, but it really focuses on the last six
[17:56] months of time. There
[18:01] we go. Go to the next slide. Um, but I just, I'm gonna cut to the chase
[18:05] and just kind of, uh, tell you the, the data, the data points,
[18:09] and then you'll hear them again too. So we just go to the last, just go all the way through this one.
[18:13] so, in the last six months, we've served 1600 individuals. Uh,
[18:17] we have gotten almost 500 individuals into emergency shelter. A hundred five eighty five
[18:22] people into transitional housing or bridge housing, and 61
[18:26] individuals permanently off the street into permanent housing. Uh, we're really proud
[18:30] of that and we rely on a lot of support, not only our staff, but
[18:35] also a lot of individuals, um, in different companies that help us with that.
[18:39] even go to the next slide. Um, just for some context, I was at the city manager conferences
[18:43] passed, uh, uh, weekend. And, uh,
[18:47] I went to a session about homelessness and there was 125 city managers in that room.
[18:51] and the question was asked, how many of you, how many of your cities
[18:56] experience homelessness? And all 125 hands went up and they said, how
[19:00] many cities have figured it all out? And not one hand went
[19:04] up and we had the chance to hear from three different cities. We heard from
[19:08] sacramento, we heard from long beach, and we heard from whittier. I just wanna share a
[19:12] couple kind of high level thoughts. I think they're useful to have that for some perspective.
[19:16] the city of long beach spends about $13 million of its
[19:20] general fund to combat homelessness. Um,
[19:25] if you were to apply a a per capita rate for us, that would be about $3 million
[19:29] for the city of el cajon. We do not spend $3 million out of our general fund. We're able to
[19:33] leverage a lot of other funds for the programs that we do. I'm really proud of that. Um,
[19:37] but one of the things that long beach found is some things that aren't working in
[19:41] their community happen to be working in our community. The tiny cabins work really well
[19:46] in our community. They've abandoned the tiny cabin solution because it just doesn't
[19:50] work in long beach. And so it's, it was a good reminder that there's
[19:54] not this one size fits all, that every community is a little bit different and needs
[19:58] to be tailored a little bit different. Yet at the same time, there's a real need
[20:02] to have some uniform measuring of how, or the metrics of
[20:06] how we measure success. We, and we lack that in this county.
[20:11] um, and we, we lack that throughout the state of california. It's the reason why we spend billions
[20:15] of dollars and see almost zero results. 'cause we're not measuring the appropriate
[20:19] way. The second, uh, city that I heard from is from city of whittier.
[20:24] they actually adopted a three quarter cent sales tax, um, about
[20:28] four years ago. And they allocated about a quarter of that sales
[20:32] tax. So about a a quarter or 20.25% of their sales tax
[20:36] measure goes specifically to homelessness, about $3 million for
[20:40] that community. And they've actually stood up their own homeless shelter. I thought that was kind of interesting,
[20:44] which gives them a little bit more authority and control to do some certain things. And then
[20:48] the last city was sacramento, as you know, sacramento. If you've been to sacramento, homeless is
[20:52] rampant there. They've, they've struggled for years. Um, there's
[20:57] been a lot of pointed fingers between them and the county,
[21:01] sacramento city and their county are actually working together.
[21:05] it's, it's a great model and uh, that's something that
[21:10] I envy 'cause we do not get support from the county of san diego. Our
[21:14] county has an opportunity to be real leaders in this area and they fail to
[21:18] do so. And so we, we will continue to work with them and try to strive
[21:22] for some regional planning because we know that if we're all pulling together at the
[21:26] same time, we'll be much more successful. So there's a little bit of context. I'm gonna turn
[21:30] the time over to yani brito, our senior management analyst, to give a report
[21:34] for the last six months and where we're at, and then seek any direction that you'd like us to shift
[21:39] in the next six months. Thank you.
[21:43] I will go ahead and, um, briefly go over three categories that
[21:47] the city is using to address homelessness. Uh, that's going to include
[21:52] outreach efforts, housing and shelter and enforcement and encampments. Uh,
[21:56] the city, along with service providers conducts street outreach. During
[22:00] outreach. Homeless individuals are offered connections to wraparound services. The
[22:04] providers include a-c-t-l-c, homestar and crisis house.
[22:09] during the last six months, from july to december, 2024,
[22:13] a total of a bit over 161,000 was expended.
[22:17] and this was using cdbg and plha funding.
[22:22] this resulted in being able to contact 625
[22:26] individuals out of those 20 were able to move into some sort of housing.
[22:31] some of the challenges identified during this process, uh, do include building trust
[22:36] with clients over time. This does delay the attempts needed for engagement.
[22:41] additionally, some individuals experience mental health and substance abuse. So the outreach workers
[22:45] do try and match them with those who, um, do offer that service for them.
[22:51] under the housing and shelter category programs include
[22:56] reunification, emergency placement, emergency shelter, rapid
[23:00] rehousing, and rental assistance. The
[23:04] providers for these programs are the salvation army crisis house, e-c-t-l-c,
[23:08] homestar and interfaith shelter network. For this category, a total
[23:12] of about 192,000 was expended. And this was using
[23:16] c-d-b-g-p-l-h-a-a low mod income housing asset funds.
[23:23] the results were 498 sheltered individuals and 51
[23:27] placed into permanently, um, or 51 were permanently housed.
[23:32] some challenges that seem to fall with, uh, with this category
[23:36] are different barriers to permanent housing. This includes, but it's not limited to,
[23:41] uh, rental history, credit history, or not enough income per household.
[23:46] this is where cage ma case management plays a huge role in order to prepare individuals
[23:50] to become housing ready. The last
[23:54] category is enforcement and encampments for these. Oh
[23:58] yeah. And this is including, um, again, enforcement and coordinating
[24:03] encampment cleanups. The providers are, uh, city
[24:07] department's urban corp, which is a contractor and homestart. The cost
[24:11] of this for the last six months was about $105,000, and it includes
[24:15] plha and some general fund. This
[24:20] resulted in 482 contacts with a total of 25 events
[24:24] in the last six months, 55 cleanups and about 419
[24:29] tons of debris, uh, removed from the city.
[24:33] the challenge we continue to see during these services is transient population, often
[24:37] returning to the same areas. So to
[24:41] summarize some highlights, uh, from july to december, we have a total expenditure of about
[24:45] 443,000. Again, this resulted in about 1600,
[24:50] served 477 in emergency shelter, 185
[24:54] in transitional housing, and 61 in permanent housing. And the funding
[24:58] sources are c-d-b-g-p-l-h-a low mod housing asset fund and
[25:02] some general fund. As a result of the data provided,
[25:07] city, uh, staff recommends that city council continue funding all the active
[25:11] homeless services programs, uh, continue seeking new funding opportunities,
[25:16] continue support for the east county homeless task force and the
[25:20] emergency sleeping cabinets, as well as continue receiving the six month report.
[25:25] uh, we do like to thank our program providers for all their hard work.
[25:30] this concludes my presentation. Staff is available chance for questions or comments. Thank you.
[25:36] thank you very much. Can you speaker cards on
[25:40] this, sir? Yes, we have one from truth.
[25:52] hi, truth. Hi testing.
[25:56] does it sound all? No. Yeah. Okay. Yes,
[26:00] I'm speaking again in, in case anyone has an issue with it because
[26:04] I have a very important point and that is, I was inspired by graham, so I'm also gonna cut
[26:08] to the chase. Very, very transparent breakdowns of the spendings.
[26:13] so the city spending on homelessness, I wish every city reported
[26:17] like that, especially the city of san diego. And
[26:21] the county is also not transparent with our money. They have an $8.5 billion
[26:27] budget. And despite what supervisor monica montgomery step has claimed,
[26:31] we got pretty much nothing to show for it. Um, so this is the city's
[26:36] work. This has nothing to do with the county, and it's just amazing. Can you imagine if
[26:40] elon had billions to play with? Like, that could actually make a real difference
[26:44] for the entire county? Because I can see el alcohol and services, I'm very familiar with
[26:48] crisis house. I won't get into that, but I'm very familiar. I'm grateful for,
[26:52] for things that exist like that. And so thank everybody. I thank everybody
[26:56] involved for this work that went into a very transparent account. Thank you.
[27:01] thank you. No more cards,
[27:05] sir. That's it. Alright, we'll bring it back to the council for discussion.
[27:10] yes, carrie, a question for the city attorney. We get
[27:15] a substantial amount of money from, uh, c community development
[27:19] block grant funds. Has that been cut off by the
[27:23] federal government? Not to my knowledge. I know that there
[27:28] was, uh, a stay issued that, uh, um, one, one or
[27:32] more courts have issued stay saying it's, uh, likely unconstitutional. The,
[27:36] uh, but, uh, it'll be a temporary order. But for now, I
[27:40] think the, the money's continuing to flow. Okay. That, that's good. Because
[27:45] we give, uh, east county transitional living center a substantial amount
[27:49] of money. In fact, they're between 150 and 200 children. Li
[27:53] formerly homeless children living there right now. Uh,
[27:58] I was coming out a council meeting one time about 22 years ago,
[28:02] and there was a, a mom with her little
[28:06] redheaded 10-year-old son who reminded me of my son, who was 10 at the time.
[28:10] and we said, you know, what are you doing here? He said, well, you know, my husband,
[28:14] we fell through the cracks. You know, my husband's a druggie. He took off,
[28:19] and this is where we sleep under the wings of the, uh,
[28:23] city council meeting, right about 10 feet outside that door. And
[28:27] so, uh, the council, that time, we approved, uh, east county transitional
[28:31] living center and has been a spectacular success.
[28:36] in fact, I have three of the graduates living at my house right now.
[28:40] so that's, uh, you know, one of the bright
[28:44] spots. And, uh, it's like a part of it is like a
[28:48] church-based bootcamp, which I don't think any of us would like to
[28:53] be there. They, they have a facility out in the east county where they run a
[28:57] ranch and, you know, raise cattle. And, uh,
[29:01] so they, the idea is they get 'em so tired, they don't want any drugs,
[29:06] and, and it seems to be working. So, uh,
[29:10] I think it's important that we keep, uh,
[29:14] supporting them. Thank you. Thanks, gary. Anybody
[29:18] else? No, I would just say I, I agree with staff's recommendation.
[29:23] continue, uh, everything we're doing. Yeah. Steve,
[29:27] uh, for those of you that, that don't know about the tiny cabins, there are six of 'em on the
[29:31] property of meridian baptist church out in the eastern part of el cajon.
[29:35] they have put through 47 women with a 78% success rate
[29:40] into permanent housing. The, this is a four-way partnership between
[29:44] the city of el cajon, radium baptist church crisis house, and
[29:48] amicus the builder four-way partnership. That's why it works
[29:52] at a cost of less than $10,000 per cabin, built by over
[29:56] 120 volunteers who continue to pour into
[30:01] the lives of these women to make sure that, that they have the right tools and
[30:05] the, and the support they need to, to get back into a, a better place.
[30:09] there have been zero calls for police, zero calls,
[30:14] uh, from the neighbor's complaints, zero complaints from the elementary school across
[30:18] the street. Why does it work? Screening? They only take women
[30:22] who want to get off the street. There are rules. You have to
[30:27] meet with a social service counselor approximately once a week.
[30:32] and some of these women bring kids with them and they fit, uh,
[30:36] a, a woman and her two kids in an eight by 12 space
[30:40] inside that cabin. And it works. It can work. It
[30:44] doesn't need to be always a thousand person shelter. Sometimes
[30:48] you can do them six at a time. Thank you steve. Um,
[30:53] michelle and then gary. So I think we need to come up
[30:57] with some safe parking. I know the county has safe parking. They have closed it right
[31:01] now. Um, when I was doing the, uh, homeless point in time count,
[31:06] I've done it for the last few years now. Um, the county did not know that it
[31:10] was closed. Joel anderson did not know it was closed, but right now they've got it closed,
[31:14] uh, to put in electricity and water so they can put in showers.
[31:18] when I did the point in time count this year, we found a lot our
[31:23] census track that we were working off. We found a lot of people living in their cars
[31:27] and they were going to work. So I think that there's a need for
[31:32] people that are just kind of in between. They're not,
[31:36] they have a job. They just are trying to get in between,
[31:41] you know, trying to save up the money to get into housing because housing is
[31:45] an issue. And housing find, being able to afford that apartment,
[31:50] uh, afford a room. Rooms are going from anywhere from 1200
[31:54] to $1,500 just for an a room. So I think that we
[31:58] need to come up with some new ideas. Um, churches, I know that there
[32:02] was one church who was interested in doing rv parking, and I think we
[32:07] need to look into some new ideas. We've got some great programs already, but
[32:11] I'd like the council to maybe look into some, uh, safe parking.
[32:15] uh, if churches are, have the capacity, like our, our tiny homes, they
[32:19] have the showers, they have, uh, capabilities of feeding
[32:24] people. If good shepherd ministries wanted to do
[32:28] rv parking, we need to look into that and get some of these rvs
[32:32] off the street. Or maybe a truck if someone wants to park their truck or their
[32:36] car. So this is something I'd like the council to look into. Can, can we, um,
[32:43] can we check with the county to see a timeline as to when their
[32:47] safe parking is gonna reopen? Because it sounds like they're doing public improvements.
[32:52] they're, they're doing public improvements. But the problem is,
[32:56] is that it, the, the minute that closed down, the homeless moved
[33:00] back in. Now I contacted the director of homeless solutions, uh, deanna
[33:05] beck and I was reporting and sending her pictures
[33:09] like every week they just moved in. They were moving back into the canals
[33:13] right there. Right. And it's been at least a couple of months, the
[33:17] county's really slow and revitalizing that safe parking.
[33:21] could we have staff just check in to see when, when we anticipate
[33:25] that coming back in? We, we can do that. It's been closed for quite a while. And, and if you look at the cost
[33:30] that the, the ro the return on investments,
[33:34] I, I, I question if they're having to bring water and electricity over, if that
[33:38] makes a lot of sense. Yeah. But, but we'll find out. I mean, that safe parking, you
[33:42] know, it's only open from 6:00 pm to 6:00 am it seemed like it served a good purpose.
[33:46] so we'll find out and we'll send a memo to the city council. Gary did .
[33:50] yes. Uh, I wanted to point out that councilman gobel
[33:55] spent countless hours volunteering to build those
[33:59] tiny houses with his own two hands. And not
[34:03] only does he talk the talk, but he walks the walk.
[34:11] um, my 2 cents on, uh, going forward,
[34:15] I, I think we're gonna have, have to find a way to work closer with the county.
[34:19] I, I'd love to find out how the county, how the county is allocating
[34:23] its resources to homelessness where, where they're spending their money, specifically in regard
[34:27] to each city, each municipality, you know,
[34:32] I know we're not getting any money from the county, but our other municipality is getting money from
[34:36] the county. If so, what's the disparagement? And, uh,
[34:40] but you know, I, I think that we're gonna have to, um, find a way to sit down
[34:45] together because this problem is
[34:49] probably bigger than we can, we can do on our own. Since all the money comes to the county, it
[34:53] seems like they should have a seat at that table. There is new leadership at
[34:57] the cao level at the county. There's new leadership at hhsa. There's new leadership
[35:01] at the, the homeless, uh, department. So maybe there's an opportunity to,
[35:06] uh, men some fences. Yeah. I have no doubt that joel anderson's office would
[35:10] be willing to help us in that regard. Yeah. Okay. Two,
[35:14] two things really quickly is one, there is the county does offer safe parking right now in
[35:18] spring valley. There's a site in spring valley where there's safe parking and that's good to know. We can help direct
[35:23] people there. The second thing is, one of the council priorities from your
[35:27] workshop last month was to beef up the, uh,
[35:31] dashboard on our city website. Which again, is very transparent,
[35:35] but it can be better. One of the things that ms. Diaz is doing is actually having all
[35:39] of her staff that will be involved with the dashboard do ride alongs with the
[35:43] outreach team. So they're not sitting in an office thinking what they know is
[35:48] happening. They're actually gonna be on the street. They're going to touch it, feel it, smell it,
[35:52] all that, and they'll have a better sense of really what will help
[35:56] our residents know what should be on the dashboard. So I thought I'd share that info with you.
[36:00] alright, carrie, a question for the city manager. Is the
[36:05] county still, uh,
[36:09] collecting homeless people from all around the county, north
[36:13] county and south county and putting them into el cajon hotels? Yeah, I can
[36:17] check. Actually, yani, if you go to the next slide. So this, this slide actually
[36:21] shows, uh, voucher program only offered by ewis. There's,
[36:25] there are three or four other county voucher programs in the, in this city.
[36:29] um, this is just equis portion that really de sharp
[36:34] decline in usage of our motels was when the city council
[36:38] adopted your policy where we start requiring some accountability. It's interesting, when you
[36:42] ask for accountability, you get certain results. So you can see there's been a little bit of an
[36:46] ebb and flow, but there has been a significant drop right now where I think at, uh, last week at
[36:50] 84, um, individuals in motels, um, based
[36:54] on our data that we've asked for, we still believe that the
[36:59] majority, uh, not the majority, but a, a a large percentage
[37:03] are not from the city of el cajon. Um, but there's nothing we can do about that.
[37:07] but it's good to know that at least why don't you have the, um, data from the other
[37:12] ngos? Because the county only shares this with us
[37:17] and we rely on them self-reporting and
[37:21] to get this level of detail. We don't get that level of detail from them. Okay.
[37:25] bill. It should be a goal, I think. Yeah. Is the county still
[37:30] paying double the normal rate for those motel rooms? We
[37:34] believe that they're paying between a hundred and forty six, a hundred fifty $6 a night,
[37:38] uh, for a hotel stay. Okay. At, at a rate where most of these
[37:43] motels are, are going for 80 to $90 a night.
[37:47] okay. Uh, and are they, I know before we had some child
[37:51] molesters with that were convicted with the ankle
[37:56] bracelets and they weren't being vetted and we have a problem with them.
[38:00] 'cause they were, they were in motels that were near elementary
[38:05] schools and some girls were assaulted. Uh, has, have they
[38:09] addressed that problem? Your, your policy has addressed that problem because,
[38:13] because state law gives them a pretty long period of
[38:17] time before they have to report under your new regulations. They have to report within hours
[38:21] of being placed in el cajon. So we will know if that's the case. It has not been the case
[38:25] thus far since the policy went into effect. Thank you.
[38:29] mr. City manager. Um,
[38:34] the county motel voucher program, the funding, it was
[38:39] arpa is it is are have, has the county allocated
[38:43] funds, um, outside of arpa for voucher programs?
[38:47] they may be still using some arpa funds or some residual, um,
[38:51] covid money. Okay. Uh, I, at some point that will dry up, like ours
[38:56] is dried up, so I'm not quite sure how they're gonna fund this program after. Oh, so they you not to
[39:00] your knowledge that they've don't know how they're gonna continue to fund it. Got it. Thank you.
[39:04] okay. Anybody else? Alright, thanks. Do you have enough direction? That's
[39:08] very helpful. Thank you so much. Well, thank you.
[39:13] okay. There are no commission reports on today's agenda.
[39:20] item 12 is my activity report, which is as reported.
[39:24] and then where activities reports for council members. Gobel, uh,
[39:29] as reported with one comment about an mts meeting, executive meeting, uh,
[39:33] last week, the mts is facing a hundred million dollars budget
[39:37] shortfall to make up even if they discontinue
[39:41] the entire trolley system, but it'll only save half of that. So there is no
[39:45] discussion of discontinuing the trolley. I'm just giving you a sense of how
[39:50] big the problem is. There were two, uh, items
[39:54] that were put forth on the staff recommendation. One was an operational analysis
[39:58] of all the buses and the trolleys that rind and how many people are on the buses
[40:02] and things like that. See if there's any efficiency. The other was a
[40:06] potential sales tax coming in next year of a half a
[40:10] cent, uh, to, to take over that, uh,
[40:14] my comment was I would like to see a third option and that is,
[40:19] I think the public would expect a shared participation of everybody
[40:23] in trying to close that gap. And so I put on the,
[40:27] um, agenda a fair increase for those riding
[40:32] the bus and trolley because that seems fair, no pun intended, uh,
[40:36] that everyone should participate in the solution. That would take
[40:40] one year to do that would be done by sandag. And those three items will be voted on
[40:44] at the mts board meeting this thursday. Thank you. Okay.
[40:48] thank you steve. Um, mr. Kendrick? Okay. Uh,
[40:53] I'd like to add that I went to a metro, uh, joint
[40:58] powers agreement meeting last thursday.
[41:03] mr. Ortiz, uh, as reported ms. Mitchell as
[41:07] reported. Okay. Then
[41:14] there is one joint council member report on today's agenda is from council member gobel and
[41:19] myself. This is what we're all here for tonight. This I, since I'm the one who
[41:23] brought it last time, I'm gonna get, leave it to, uh, mr. Gobel to
[41:27] explain and we'll go from there. Thank you, mr. Mayor. The
[41:31] day after the last meeting, uh, we had three resolutions before us
[41:35] and none of the three got passed, but I think the entire council agreed
[41:39] on at least, at least two things. Number one, we're not a sanctuary city.
[41:44] and number two, we would not block, obstruct, hinder, otherwise interfere with the federal government
[41:48] coming into remove violent criminals from our city.
[41:52] so I think we were really close. Uh, we just kind of ran out
[41:56] of time. And so the next day I reached out to the mayor. I said, uh,
[42:01] I think we can find a common ground for all of us. And my particular
[42:05] concern was once we started talking about police officers, then I said, well,
[42:10] I want indemnification or protection or defense from
[42:14] the federal government for our police officers if they're doing something
[42:18] lawful in the course of their duties. I'll talk about that situation
[42:22] in a little bit. Uh, my position on this issue has not changed.
[42:27] it is still about public safety for me, the city of el cajon is
[42:31] not a sanctuary, never has been. And I will continue to fight
[42:35] to make sure that we are never a sanctuary city. I
[42:39] support president trump's position to enforce federal immigration law to red our city
[42:43] of the most serious and violent criminals living
[42:47] here illegally. I welcome tom holman trump's borders
[42:51] are to do this. And speaking of mr. Holman, I recently had the opportunity
[42:56] to meet with him in mid-november. Her friends said to
[43:00] meet, tom and I worked together here in the city of el cajon in the early nineties, and we're
[43:04] still in touch. Would you like to meet him? I said, of course, I'd like to hear what he has to
[43:09] say, but we should invite the mayor as well. And so that's what I did. I invited
[43:13] mayor wells to that meeting a few days before christmas. We all
[43:17] met and we listened to tom's plan to get 647,000
[43:22] people living illegally in the city who had been convicted or wanted for serious
[43:26] and violent crimes. He also talked about the urgency to find
[43:30] 300,000 missing minors. The mayor and I
[43:34] both told him we are not a sanctuary city and
[43:38] welcomed him to come get the violent criminals out of our city
[43:42] and we wouldn't be satisfied until they're all gone. I can assure
[43:46] you mr. Holman is committed to making our city safe from the criminal aliens
[43:51] who are harmful to our residents. Further, I welcome any and
[43:55] all law enforcement agencies who will remove violent
[44:00] criminals from our city. At the same time, I
[44:04] believe our officers are not, cannot and should not be immigration
[44:08] agents today when you call for help, our police officers
[44:13] don't ask any one of their citizenship status. They won't even know in their systems
[44:18] their job is to serve and protect. In
[44:22] the meeting with tom harmon, even he said he doesn't want local
[44:26] law enforcement to do immigration enforcement.
[44:30] the resolution which the mayor and I reached a, an agreement on before estates,
[44:35] well, actually let's say that 'cause we'll go through the resolution shortly. Uh,
[44:39] I believe working with ice border patrol or any other agency involving enforcement
[44:44] of federal immigration law should be for the sole purpose of removing violent
[44:48] criminals. Now, at the same time, we need to change sb 54
[44:53] to allow our police the option to contact ice when
[44:58] there is a known convicted criminal living
[45:02] in our city or country. Illegally. I believe that legislation is important
[45:06] and in development. I also recognize there's a
[45:10] conflict between federal and california law as b 54 on this issue,
[45:14] I and my colleagues do not have the ability to resolve this conflict. And I
[45:19] don't want this conflict to boil over and punish our police officers in any
[45:23] way. That's why I offered an amendment to the resolution before
[45:27] us to quote, seek assistance from the united states attorney general's
[45:31] office to indemnify or defend our city and its employees for
[45:35] any assistance or cooperation with federal integration authorities as
[45:39] permitted by law, we need to send a strong message,
[45:44] especially to our police officers that we have their backs.
[45:48] the amended resolution adding to seek protection for our employees when acting
[45:52] lawfully in the course of their duties is for the sole purpose
[45:57] of getting rid of serious and violent criminals and to protect the
[46:01] people in the city of el cajon. So let's take a look at this
[46:05] resolution we're talking about today. You can see the title here. I
[46:09] won't read the whole thing. Let's go on to the next point. Resolve
[46:14] that the city declares its intent to comply with the enforcement of federal immigration law
[46:18] to the legal extent permissible, which means according to the
[46:22] current law for the sole purpose, the only purpose of
[46:26] removing those that have committed violent criminal offenses as defined by
[46:30] california penal code, et cetera. Number two, resolved.
[46:34] we declare we are not a sanctuary city. We will not obstruct, impede,
[46:39] interfere, or otherwise block any federal law enforcement agency from its
[46:43] duties. Number three, that we'll seek assistance from the
[46:47] attorney general's office to indemnify the city and its employees for any assistance
[46:52] as permitted by law. Number four, that we remain steadfast in
[46:56] our commitment to protecting the safety and wellbeing of our residents, particularly
[47:00] those most vulnerable to criminal activities such as human trafficking and drug
[47:04] distribution. Number five, that we will continue to comply with all
[47:08] federal and state laws recognizing there are conflicts between federal
[47:12] and state laws. Number six, we recognize the importance of meeting,
[47:17] maintaining trust within the community. And we are reaffirm our commitment to treating
[47:21] all residents with dignity and respect regardless of integration status.
[47:26] number seven, we will continue to request additional clarification
[47:30] and guidance from both the us and california ag.
[47:34] and number eight, uh, the city clerk is elected to send a
[47:38] copy of this to the people listed. This is essentially the same
[47:42] resolution, but with my desire to add protection for, for our police officers
[47:47] if they're going to provide any assistance. Let me give you an example.
[47:53] if somebody runs the border patrol checkpoint in pine valley
[47:57] and the border patrol begins a chase and that chase comes down into
[48:02] el cajon, if that person gets onto our city street,
[48:07] we are not allowed to join that chase. That is an immigration issue.
[48:12] however, if that person runs a red light
[48:18] speeds or does some other violation of california law, we may
[48:22] join the chase. So at that point,
[48:26] if we pull over the car and if we hand over that person
[48:30] to ice, we did so lawfully because we
[48:34] pulled that pull person over for running a red light and speeding.
[48:38] we did not pull that per pull. We did not pull that person over
[48:43] for violating immigration law. If anyone to
[48:47] were to come after our police officers and say you violated
[48:52] law by assisting ice or border patrol in this example, that's
[48:56] not true. We pulled that person over because they ran a red light and they
[49:00] sped in our city. We need to protect our officers.
[49:04] we can't make them second guess what they do to keep
[49:08] us safe. That's the resolution before us. I think
[49:13] we have come to a, uh, a reasonable, uh, concern
[49:17] about use protection, compliance with existing law.
[49:22] and I think, uh, I'd be interested to hear what my colleagues have to say and then
[49:26] the public, um, you know
[49:30] what I, what I'm gonna do at this point because
[49:34] I think when we discuss all this, we're gonna want to discuss the things that the public
[49:38] has to say about it. So rather than do this twice, I'm going to do
[49:42] public comment when that's all finished, we will have discussion here. Everybody
[49:46] okay with that? Yeah. Oh, okay. Great. So we're gonna go to public comment before we
[49:50] start. Um, I'm gonna limit public comment to two minutes.
[49:55] I I want you to know that I was under a lot of pressure to limit public comment to one
[49:59] minute, but I have problems with that. The, I I think the first amendment
[50:03] gives us everybody the opportunity to speak. And we may be here a long time tonight,
[50:07] but, but that's okay. So I think two minutes is a good compromise. Um,
[50:11] I'm hoping everybody will be respectful of everybody else and we can just move through
[50:15] this and get to the end and come to a conclusion. Um,
[50:20] having said that, let's start with public comment. Thank
[50:24] you, sir. We have 46 speakers and as we did last time, we
[50:28] will call people in in three. When we call your name, if you can please
[50:32] stand down the middle aisle and be ready to speak so it can move
[50:36] a little bit quicker. The first three speakers are larry
[50:41] olds, nicole bacca, and melissa ortiz baldwin.
[50:48] hello, sir. Welcome. Good afternoon.
[50:54] sb 54 is the fly in the ointment for I think all of us,
[50:58] and it's been discussed and talked about and written about. And I found a passage on the
[51:02] internet that I thought was particularly good. And
[51:06] what it says is, federal law is unambiguous in its supremacy
[51:10] over immigration matters. Under the supremacy clause of
[51:15] the constitution, federal law takes precedence over conflicting states
[51:19] and locale local policies. The immigration
[51:23] and nationality act grants the federal government exclusive authority over
[51:27] immigration enforcement and congress has determined
[51:31] that cooperation between law, uh, local law enforcement and
[51:36] federal immigration authorities is essential. Statutes
[51:40] such as eight usc 1373 explicitly
[51:45] prohibit state and local governments from enacting policies
[51:50] that reflect, uh, that restrict communications with federal
[51:54] immigration agencies. Did you hear what I said?
[51:59] statutes such as eight usc 1373
[52:04] explicitly prohibit states and local governments from enacting policies
[52:08] that restrict communications with federal and immigration
[52:12] agencies. This status ensures that local officials cannot block or impede
[52:17] the flow of critical information needed to enforce federal immigration.
[52:21] moreover, the refusal of the to honor ice detainers undermines
[52:25] the public safety rationale underlying immigration
[52:30] enforcement detainers are issued against individuals who have been arrested
[52:34] for violating state or local laws, meaning these are individuals
[52:38] already found to pose a threat to the community by refusing
[52:42] to comply with ice detainer, sanctuary jurisdictions actively
[52:46] shield criminal aliens from de deportation allowing them to be released
[52:51] back into the communities. I'm running out of time. Yeah. Thank you,
[52:55] sir. I appreciate it. But thank you. But I, I'm, I'm, I do like what,
[52:59] what you're doing there. If you live up to that, I am much better with
[53:03] your decision. Thank you, sir.
[53:09] well, welcome. Hi. Can I pull that down? Yeah. Hi.
[53:14] good afternoon. I urge you to reject this proposal. My
[53:18] name's nicole and I spoke at the last city council meeting, and I'm also a lifelong
[53:22] resident of el cajon. Much like everyone here today, I feel strongly about
[53:26] this resolution put in front of us. I'm opposed to this not because
[53:30] I'm opposed to law and consequence, but I'm opposed to it because immigration
[53:34] is not the job of the elcon police department. Remove politics
[53:39] from this for a second. What is the job of local law enforcement
[53:43] to police the community and be a responsible and trusted entity in society?
[53:47] this resolution does not accomplish that. Furthermore, our primary
[53:52] crime issues in el cajon are related to homelessness and drugs, which this
[53:56] resolution does not address to the naked eye. Immigration is not the cause of
[54:00] those problems, hence, the reason I feel the way that I do this
[54:04] resolution, in my opinion, is a misuse of our already limited resources.
[54:09] I understand that there are different political leanings on this, and no amount of time
[54:13] or number of speeches are going to change the way that people feel. So
[54:17] that tells us that there might be value in understanding perspective. This
[54:21] resolution does not accomplish building community trust or tackle our primary
[54:26] policing concerns. After the last city council meeting, mayor wells said that our
[54:30] community was less safe as a result of it not passing. But what
[54:34] has changed in the last two weeks? Nothing. So if nothing has changed,
[54:39] how did things become more dangerous for the residents of el cajon?
[54:43] go on whatever social media you choose, and there's video documentation in real
[54:47] time of these kinds of policies going awry, we have to ask ourselves,
[54:52] who does this resolution benefit the community by removing the father
[54:56] of visiting his five-year-old daughter in their home,
[55:01] or bill wells, who has tv cameras here today who can get his sound bites
[55:05] in to go on newsmax or kusi later today? It
[55:09] is a waste of time and a waste of our resources. I urge you to vote no thank
[55:13] you. Please prioritize policies that foster safety and trust
[55:18] rather than division and fear. Thank you.
[55:25] after ms. Ortiz, uh, we have mayors ryan, ms.
[55:29] strange, and mary maureen braham.
[55:35] uh, good afternoon. My name's melissa ortiz baldwin, no relation to phil.
[55:40] um, first this resolution continues the fear mon
[55:44] monering tactics to persuade the public to allow police collaboration with
[55:48] ice. Uh, the resolution on page one of the resolution
[55:53] states our claims there are over 647,000
[55:57] non undocumented individuals convicted of violent crimes.
[56:02] this is false according to the counsel's own exhibit, specifically
[56:06] a letter from ice pages seven and nine of the resolution.
[56:10] the actual number of un violent criminals
[56:15] is 271,917 nationwide.
[56:20] the resolution, however, falsely implies that this number is more than twice
[56:24] as high. My second issue with this
[56:28] is that it seeks to bypass state government oversight, censure, and potential
[56:32] repercussions by appealing to trump and his allies for federal protection.
[56:37] this is page two, item three of the resolution. This sets a dangerous
[56:41] precedent and appears to be a political move by bill wells
[56:45] to align with the trump administration. Something he himself admitted to
[56:49] at the last council meeting when he stated his intent to plant a flag for
[56:54] trump. Now, there was a person earlier this said that
[56:58] she was speaking out of a place of love as she proceeded to excoriate.
[57:02] council member mitchell speaking, passionate about something
[57:07] important to you and your constituents is actually proof that you care about
[57:11] your constituents. Please,
[57:15] please, council member michelle, do not let people who don't
[57:19] like where you stand just like you.
[57:31] hello everybody. I'm gonna just go ahead and echo as she just said, because
[57:35] this morning steve gobel, you got an email from patricia monon from
[57:39] the alliance san diego for immigration. And she also agrees that those numbers
[57:43] are wrong. So I urge you to look at that email. She's urging you to vote no.
[57:48] but I also wanna point out that on thursday, january 31st, two days after
[57:52] this proposition was struck down on the corner of gustavo and hamshaw, we
[57:56] got our first report at 7:20 am of a checkpoint in which
[58:00] a resident was asked for his, uh, driver's license and
[58:04] for his registration like normal. Once it was handed over to him, he
[58:08] was then asked for his legal status. Guess the color of his skin? Everybody.
[58:13] it was brown. When he, uh, invoked his right to
[58:17] decline to answer, that officer threw the, uh, license
[58:22] and registration back at his chest and told him to go.
[58:26] okay, so now let's get to it. Okay, because let's get to number three
[58:31] because I'm here to challenge you on line number three of this
[58:35] proposition. Specifically the word indemnify. Okay.
[58:39] this council didn't choose that word by accident. Indemnify means
[58:43] to shield from liability to preemptively excuse wrongdoing.
[58:48] instead, this word serves as a free pass for
[58:52] law enforcement or city officials who violate sb 54.
[58:57] you cannot claim neutrality on this issue either
[59:02] you stand with your community, your neighbors, your constituents,
[59:07] or you stand against us. If this council truly
[59:12] believes in fairness and the rule of law, then I demand that you provide a clear
[59:16] margin of protection for the people with no violent record
[59:20] in this proposition at all costs. Amended last part
[59:24] of line number three. Instead of the vague phrase permitted by law,
[59:29] it must explicitly state compliance with the california penal code
[59:33] already referenced in this proposition. That is all I have to say. Thanks steve.
[59:45] could could you please state your name? Oh, I will. Yes.
[59:49] good afternoon. My name is mayors ryan. I appreciate this opportunity to
[59:53] speak with this council. Um, I am asking this council
[59:58] to vote no on this resolution. I've been a teacher at the college and middle school
[1:00:02] level for 20 years, and I am presently teaching in
[1:00:06] el cajon. During all of this time, I have taught students of all colors.
[1:00:11] I have a stake in el cajon issues as well. I owned a home
[1:00:15] for 35 years up in crest. All three of my
[1:00:19] children went to granite hills and three of my grandchildren attend
[1:00:24] local schools here. My son and daughter live and work here as
[1:00:28] well. So I understand being protective
[1:00:32] of where your loved ones live and attend school.
[1:00:36] and I can see that you might project that this resolution
[1:00:40] will keep you safer. But what I do not understand
[1:00:45] is the hate and the disinformation associated with
[1:00:49] dumping all of the responsibility for all of the city's
[1:00:53] crime on a group of people because of the color of their skin.
[1:00:58] like mr. Gobel and mr. Kendrick have both said today,
[1:01:03] this council is here to protect all kids. Please vote
[1:01:07] no on this resolution.
[1:01:19] taxpayers oversight for parents and students want to inform you that
[1:01:23] since the last time we were here, the lake and riley act passed
[1:01:27] the very next day. Steve, you got almost
[1:01:32] a million views on libs of tiktok. The headlines read, and I quote,
[1:01:36] el cajon wants their city to be overrun by criminal
[1:01:40] immigrants. The laken act mandates
[1:01:45] the federal detention of illegal immigrants who are accused
[1:01:49] of theft, burglary, assault, law enforcement officers,
[1:01:53] and any crime that causes death or serious bodily
[1:01:57] injury, of course we must welcome immigrants.
[1:02:02] but since the cartels have taken over by trafficking fentanyl
[1:02:06] and tens of thousands of women and children,
[1:02:10] you'll have more homeless and death if you don't pass this
[1:02:14] resolution. Did I mention you'll lose your federal funding too?
[1:02:19] I sincerely hope you can reform arc immigration laws
[1:02:24] to expedite processing qualified individuals because
[1:02:28] we do need legal immigration for their safety
[1:02:32] as well as ours. I love immigrants. They're two of them in my
[1:02:37] family. I'm married to one my sister-in-law. We need immigrants, but
[1:02:41] it took them five years to get naturalized
[1:02:45] citizens. I think we can do better. Thank you. An advance board for being
[1:02:49] here today and passing this common sense resolution. Thank you
[1:02:58] ara. Dr. Joanna rose, uh, bermuda
[1:03:03] and adriana hassel right
[1:03:07] now. Any, any order, just state your name please. Okay. Hi. I am dr. Joanna
[1:03:11] rose bez. Here again, how to schedule nine
[1:03:15] patients rescheduled. Nine patients in my clinic. Sp 54
[1:03:20] prohibits local police from working with ice, except in some circumstances passing
[1:03:24] a resolution not identical to s sp 54 to cooperate with ice violates
[1:03:28] this law courts ruled that holding someone on a ice detainer without proper
[1:03:33] legal authority violates the fourth amendment. The police department risk lawsuits
[1:03:37] if they cooperate with ice with no judicial warrant. Cities that ignore immigration
[1:03:41] laws will face legal action from the state. The california attorney general's
[1:03:46] office has stated they're monitoring compliance and will take action against
[1:03:50] non-compliance deportations. Take members from your local workforce,
[1:03:54] which will tank your town's economy. This means a higher
[1:03:58] cost of living in el cajon. Your town will face
[1:04:02] costly lawsuits as the police work with ice in violation of state law. California
[1:04:07] will withhold funding from this town due to non-compliance. Cooperating
[1:04:11] with ice will strain local ems resulting in public safety risk.
[1:04:15] since what you're doing is highly unethical and legally questionable.
[1:04:20] I have reported you to the san diego county da, the san diego or the state
[1:04:24] attorney general. The state auditor, the department of justice, and to congresswoman sara jacobs
[1:04:29] who was unaware that you are trying to pass this again, another history lesson
[1:04:33] for you. California used to be mexico. Those of us who are mexican
[1:04:37] have indigenous blood. Okay? Our connection to
[1:04:42] this land isn't just historical, it's ancestral. And we're not talking about borders
[1:04:46] drawn on math. So talking about birthrights and I challenge you look down
[1:04:50] at where your feet rest. This is indigenous land.
[1:04:54] it has always been, and it's time. We all recognize that undeniable
[1:04:59] truth. And I heard the voicemails you got steve, I know you were chastised,
[1:05:03] threatened and harassed. And I'm sorry, I'm very sorry that happened to you 'cause I
[1:05:07] know you probably have kids and you're probably scared. And I'm sorry. And that's all I
[1:05:11] have to say.
[1:05:20] the next, the next three speakers, and if you could please, once you hear your name, come
[1:05:25] and stand in the middle aisle, please. Audra adriana hassel
[1:05:29] and amy reker.
[1:05:41] hi. Hello again. Oh my gosh. Imagine the
[1:05:46] misguidance and misunderstanding going on in this room. It's
[1:05:50] interesting 'cause you guys are seemingly trying to protect against violent
[1:05:55] criminals. It's weird that it's a problem and that people
[1:05:59] are like against that. And then when I call out somebody being violent,
[1:06:03] they say that I am just by asking you to be calm and collected.
[1:06:08] so now I get why there's so much misguidance in this room and people
[1:06:12] don't want to actually protect against violence.
[1:06:16] and they're misunderstanding what's actually going on and saying
[1:06:21] it's something that it isn't. Because sometimes when
[1:06:25] people want to hear something, that's what they hear instead of actually listening
[1:06:29] to what's going on and understanding what you guys are trying to do.
[1:06:34] so to me, what I'm understanding is that a lot of people want violent
[1:06:38] criminals to run rampant and have nothing be done about it 'cause of the color of their skin,
[1:06:42] even though they're white, black, asian, you name it, they're all colors.
[1:06:48] so it's very sad to see that there's so many people that would prefer a
[1:06:52] child to be raped or, you know, whatever. But like, why should we go after them and
[1:06:56] remove them from our country, especially if they came here illegally.
[1:07:00] but you guys will lose your federal funding if you go and try and obstruct the
[1:07:04] federal government from being able to do their job, which would actually
[1:07:08] impede this city and hinder its ability to do the things that
[1:07:13] it needs to do. So it's a surprise and a wonder why people that want
[1:07:17] more money to come in don't wanna actually get in the way of that
[1:07:21] happening. So good for you guys for doing and trying to stand up for what's
[1:07:25] right and actually protect the people. But I guarantee you there's
[1:07:29] two of you on here that don't wanna protect the people because you are confused
[1:07:33] about what this means and, and that if anything happens to anybody,
[1:07:38] it's your guys' fault and you're complicit and culpable in it.
[1:07:42] so god's speed. Thank you to all of you guys.
[1:07:49] alright, ladies and gentlemen, I'm, I'm watching the time. Three
[1:07:53] minutes won. Wasn't over. Go ahead. My name's amy rechart and
[1:07:57] I'm with restore san diego. And everybody that's here that we
[1:08:02] ask to be here is for one reason and one reason only.
[1:08:06] we don't want violent criminals in our community.
[1:08:11] period. End of story. This should not be a debate.
[1:08:16] we should not be called anti-christian or racist.
[1:08:20] there was an earlier speaker who referenced that actually the, the number of violent
[1:08:24] criminals president in the united states that have, uh, come
[1:08:28] here illegally is only 270,000. Well,
[1:08:32] that's 270,000 too many.
[1:08:37] so I wanna say thank you so much, steve.
[1:08:41] in particular, I wanna say thank you so much for reconsidering
[1:08:45] this and bringing this again because the community supports you
[1:08:49] and, and regardless of the rhetoric on each side
[1:08:53] and the accusations of of racism, and you're not being a christian,
[1:08:58] I think we can all come together and say we don't want
[1:09:02] violent criminals in el cajon. So thank you.
[1:09:11] next speakers, mary davis, ben good,
[1:09:15] and carlos gomez perez.
[1:09:20] hi, uh, good afternoon mary davis. So, uh, first of all, I
[1:09:24] do have to touch on what audra mentioned and um, I do try to always speak, uh,
[1:09:28] in public with a gentle answer. But, um, councilwoman
[1:09:33] mitchell, I was very disturbed. Uh, I know you had your viral moment and you talked
[1:09:37] about the fear of being made to look like a racist. But enforcing
[1:09:41] our laws and keeping residents safe isn't racist.
[1:09:45] it's called upholding your oath of office. Um, yes.
[1:09:49] and so I also, uh, have to touch on legal immigration
[1:09:54] and I would say everybody in this room is absolutely for legal immigration.
[1:09:58] I was just down at san ysidro the other day. I saw a bus. So there was a line of what
[1:10:02] you call military age men, 18 to 40. And I was kind of concerned
[1:10:06] at first, and they're all lined up for this bus. Well, it turns out when I did my research, they're
[1:10:11] here for a legal visa immigration under h two. Um, it's
[1:10:15] a recruiting for agriculture though. That's the type of legal immigration
[1:10:19] that almost everybody, I would say in this room is absolutely for. We want people
[1:10:23] that are gonna come here, work hard, obey the law. That said, um,
[1:10:28] lastly, I do wanna touch on, uh, one of my seatmates next to me kept talking
[1:10:32] about kids in cages. And, um, and I get that that's
[1:10:36] a thing because it actually ha happened under obama also. But I'm going to,
[1:10:40] uh, call your kids in cages trope and I'm going to
[1:10:45] raise you kids in coffins. These are the three girls that were
[1:10:49] killed in sacramento directly because of sb 54.
[1:10:53] the father was arrested for a violent offense, resisting arrest,
[1:10:58] and that they let him go. A week later, he killed
[1:11:02] these three girls in a church I might add, where one of the signs says
[1:11:06] no ice in church. And so there is collateral damage.
[1:11:11] it's a matter of who pays the price. These girls should be alive. Anybody
[1:11:15] that honors sb 54 is complicit and has gras losano.
[1:11:20] thank you so much.
[1:11:27] welcome sir. Good afternoon, ms. Carlos. Go.
[1:11:31] nice to you again, mayor. So ultimately
[1:11:35] your job is to, you're claiming public safety, correct? At the
[1:11:39] end of the day, you want to keep el cajon safe. That
[1:11:43] means the constituents and the same manner your, um, your, um,
[1:11:47] your members right there. So that being said, I stand for
[1:11:51] you today to address the crucial concernt regarding the upcoming re traditional bill that
[1:11:56] could be profoundly affect our community. 'cause it will affect our community in not in a positive
[1:12:00] manner. So this last council meeting, that the people that voted against it
[1:12:04] have been harassed because of pe because
[1:12:08] they know they oppose your bill. However, it's important to recognize that con the context of
[1:12:12] this decision were being made, if the bills were introduced and passes, we must
[1:12:16] consider the possibility that those voters, those votes were not entirely made by free will. Instead,
[1:12:21] they have been influenced by harassment, intimidation. These council members have
[1:12:25] endured a decision made under the rest 'cause it is under dures. 'cause
[1:12:29] you're fearful for your life. You're being threatened. They know where you live that is not,
[1:12:34] does not reflect genuine support or their form. It's product of external pressure
[1:12:38] that is towards the integrity of the decision making process. The council's
[1:12:42] rule that your council rule is to serve the public, make informed decisions, and uphold
[1:12:46] justice and law. Like I said last time, I didn't think I was gonna
[1:12:50] have to be doing this back here stateside. So if you're
[1:12:54] changed your mind on after two weeks of talking
[1:12:59] to each other, it is not out of the woo goodness of your heart.
[1:13:03] it is not because you care about public safety. It's because mayor, you're trying to get your
[1:13:07] career steps going. And two, it's at the rest. And please
[1:13:12] wait, wait till we finish speaking so we can hear each other. I get it. We
[1:13:16] support each other, but let's wait till the finish speaking so we can go ahead and clap as loud as
[1:13:20] we want. That being said, do not pass a reform. It will not be good for the city.
[1:13:24] it will not be good for constituents. It won't be good for anyone. And no, we don't
[1:13:28] want criminals in this, in the city. Thank you. Thank you.
[1:13:36] after mr. Goode, we have kaylee, uh, jarad,
[1:13:40] kirsten jarad and lucas jarad
[1:13:45] gentlemen, ma'am, uh, two weeks ago, we got it wrong.
[1:13:49] um, and I, I wanna thank mr. Gobel. I know you took
[1:13:54] a lot of emails. I know you took some from a really smart lady named trina goode. And,
[1:13:58] um, we're both in over our skis on her. Uh, that's gonna be a completely intellectual,
[1:14:04] uh, intelligent, precise thing that's gonna come out of her out of
[1:14:08] love. Uh, she teaches at a very hispanic school, has for over
[1:14:12] 20 years. She drives one hour every day to teach those kids. And she
[1:14:16] loves those kids and she'll protect them against anything. And that's really
[1:14:20] what we're getting into right now is a protection situation. And so I thank you for,
[1:14:24] for, for filling those emails. And she seriously respects the fact that you took the
[1:14:29] time outta your day to thoughtfully respond to her. And it wasn't harassment,
[1:14:33] it was just a process that you participated in. And thank you mr. Kendrick.
[1:14:39] earlier today, I sat there and I was, my, my jaw kind of dropped a little bit because
[1:14:43] I'm gonna quote you, the primarily purpose of local government is to protect
[1:14:47] the citizens. And that's all we're asking you to do right now is protect
[1:14:52] the citizens. We got it wrong last time. I've literally watched
[1:14:56] hundreds of thousands of people come from all over the world. It, it, it's not our
[1:15:00] hispanic people who were born here who have a birthright. As we were heard earlier today,
[1:15:05] I have personally seen thousands of people from all over the world
[1:15:10] introduced into our system in the last three and a half years. I've watched the buses
[1:15:14] go by my house, by numbers. I can't count in a day. We're talking about hundreds
[1:15:18] of buses in a week, 24 hours a day, seven days
[1:15:22] a week, three years. We do not know who those people are, and we need to protect those
[1:15:26] students that you're talking about, those kids. I agree with you completely. I think we have the same heart.
[1:15:32] the problem is we have to stand up to it now and we have to fix something that
[1:15:36] somebody else caused this. And it's a really uncomfortable place for everybody, but we still have to
[1:15:40] fix it. I beg you to follow through on what you said earlier today and protect the
[1:15:44] citizens. Thank you.
[1:15:53] hi, I'm lucas. Um, I want you to vote no on the resolution.
[1:15:57] um, I think we, we have really serious due process concerns, um, in, in light of the,
[1:16:01] uh, lake and riley act that was passed two weeks ago. Um, so basically, um,
[1:16:05] I think there's a lot of misconceptions about how this resolution works. Like, uh, if you vote no on
[1:16:09] this resolution, it doesn't mean that ice isn't able to operate in el cajon. Um, it doesn't
[1:16:14] take away the ability to, uh, of ice to arrest people who, or to, to,
[1:16:18] uh, yeah, to, to arrest people who they know have committed crimes. Um,
[1:16:22] but, uh, um, based on the lake and riley, uh,
[1:16:26] act, uh, which was passed by congress, um, the ice, when people,
[1:16:30] if our police collaborate with ice, um, and they turn people over who haven't been arrested or
[1:16:35] who have, sorry, who have not been convicted of crimes, um, uh, ice
[1:16:39] is required just based on an accusation and not based on a conviction to detain, detain
[1:16:43] people indefinitely. And they have the ability to, uh, deport people to,
[1:16:47] uh, the guantanamo bay prison facility based on just, uh, accusations
[1:16:52] of, um, of having committed violent crimes. Like they don't actually require any proof
[1:16:56] or any trial. And so we think this is a really serious due process issue. Um,
[1:17:01] we think that it's the obligation of all government, but of local government to
[1:17:05] respect the, the basic principle of due process and, uh, not allow
[1:17:09] elon residents to, um, uh, to be, uh, captured by
[1:17:13] ice or to be captured by police on, on for like, uh, as gobel
[1:17:17] said, um, for just, uh, uh, speeding for something that
[1:17:22] is nonviolent, for running through a red light. Um, then be
[1:17:26] turned over to ice and, uh, on that basis, be punished as though you had committed
[1:17:30] a murder or a violent crime because indefinite detention. Um,
[1:17:34] uh, uh, yeah, I think, uh, sorry.
[1:17:40] uh, yeah, we, I I think we, we think this is a, a
[1:17:44] real problem for due process. And I, I think you guys are obligated to vote no on
[1:17:48] this resolution, uh, to prevent this sort of, uh, abuse.
[1:17:52] um, yeah. Thank you. Thank you.
[1:18:06] hi. Hi. Um, please don't pass this resolution
[1:18:10] that will allow the police to capture el cajon residents and turn them over to ice.
[1:18:14] who, with merely an accusation and no trial can detain them indefinitely, including
[1:18:19] sending them to guantanamo bay, the infamous black site where the
[1:18:23] constitutional protections are not applied under the horrifyingly unconstitutional lake
[1:18:27] and riley act. Any undocumented migrant accused not convicted can
[1:18:31] be permanently held in a foreign labor camp over a low level crime like shoplifting.
[1:18:35] make no mistake, this is already happening. Not a single migrant. Recently, andris
[1:18:40] in gitmo was convicted in the us court. If you wanna deport, the handful of
[1:18:44] people tried and found guilty of nonviolent crimes, fine, but that's not what
[1:18:48] we're talking about. We're talking about sending alcohol residents to foreign concentration camps
[1:18:52] without trial. Trump recently gave the okay on sending migrants to prisons in
[1:18:56] el salvador where people worked 15 hours a day and often die from lack of water
[1:19:01] and disease. Uh, dhs secretary christian refuses
[1:19:05] to even pretend that these camps were, were only contained violent criminals. This
[1:19:09] is just the start of the warrior. Is this what we wanna do to our neighbors? To the people down the
[1:19:13] street who have been living peacefully for decades and who under any other administration would've
[1:19:17] continued to do so? The stake are so much higher now that the lake and riley,
[1:19:21] no due process for migrants bureau has been passed. They want to punish people as
[1:19:26] severely as though they've committed a murder, but without any trial, any investigation,
[1:19:30] any ability to confront their accuser in court. Um, they don't get their
[1:19:34] day in court. They get held indefinitely in camps, in service of a racial goal to make this
[1:19:38] country more white. The trump administration wants to board 20 million people.
[1:19:42] um, but we won't have 20 million convictions. There're gonna be 20 million people grabbed at
[1:19:46] churches and schools and rounded up on their way to work. We're not going to forget what you do
[1:19:50] here. We'll be grateful if you protect our community, and we'll be furious if you destroy it
[1:20:02] after, after ms uh, uh, jarad, we
[1:20:06] have julianne gustafson, clifton quinn, and
[1:20:10] kristen broker. My name is,
[1:20:15] my name is kirsten jarad. Thank you for the opportunity to speak.
[1:20:19] each of you took an oath to support the us constitution. So do it,
[1:20:23] do your job. Mayor wells wants to collude with the trump administration's efforts
[1:20:27] to deport 20 million people through the lake and riley act, which mandates
[1:20:32] that undocumented individuals be deported or transferred to foreign prisons
[1:20:36] and work camps where they'll be denied the protection of the fifth amendment. The
[1:20:40] right to be free from self-incrimination. The sixth amendment, the right to the right
[1:20:45] to counsel a speedy trial, an impartial jury, the right to be charged with
[1:20:49] the crime and the right to confront witnesses. The eighth amendment, the right to
[1:20:53] be free from cruel and unusual punishment. And the 14th amendment, the right to due process,
[1:20:57] equal protection, and the presumption of innocence. The lake and riley act only
[1:21:01] requires that someone be accused of a crime. There's no burden of proof, there's
[1:21:06] no trial. That's why we have the 14th amendment. Due process
[1:21:10] requires the, sorry. The 14th amendment requires due process and equal
[1:21:14] protection before someone's rights are removed. The constitution applies equally
[1:21:18] to citizens and non-citizens in the us, which is why trump wants to
[1:21:22] move people to foreign soil so they have no rights. Mayor
[1:21:27] wells has fabricated legal issue claiming that cajon must cooperate
[1:21:31] with the feds to deport people using local police. But that's not how our government
[1:21:35] works. We have a system called federalism under the 10th amendment
[1:21:40] and the supreme court precedent, police powers belong solely to the states.
[1:21:44] immigration belongs to the federal government. It's false that
[1:21:48] the el ca police are obligated to cooperate with the feds. Sb 54
[1:21:53] states that no california state or local resources can be used to assist
[1:21:57] federal immigration enforcement. California has an absolute right
[1:22:01] to make and enforce this law as elected officials sworn to uphold the
[1:22:05] constitution. It would be a dereliction of your duty to vote for this
[1:22:09] resolution. If you ever wonder what you would do in a country that was sliding into fascism,
[1:22:13] ask yourself, what are you doing right now? Much history will judge you.
[1:22:28] hi, my name's clifton quinn, and I am so impressed by the passion I'm seeing
[1:22:32] in this room on both sides. Seriously, this is the american
[1:22:36] way, and I appreciate your attention. I've spoke at the county board of supervisors
[1:22:40] when they were busy on their email, so thank you for doing this. So I
[1:22:45] appreciate the passion. And my mom is an immigrant. My wife is an
[1:22:49] immigrant, and I've never heard one person here speak anything against immigrants. Okay?
[1:22:53] that's not what this is about, right? I I truly wonder if
[1:22:57] we are talking about the same resolution. I read a simple resolution, which
[1:23:01] to me, well, I've learned not to necessarily
[1:23:05] trust big government, but I have learned to trust bill wells. I've met him several
[1:23:09] times and has heard him speak on many occasions. And I trust, I trust
[1:23:14] where bill's coming from. So I believe this, if we do not pass
[1:23:18] this, if you do not pass this resolution, I've heard from tom ham and
[1:23:22] heard of the guys at ice, and they're gonna be airing in and narrowing
[1:23:26] in on places that, that say they want to be a sanctuary city
[1:23:30] or want to grow up against ice. I don't think that's a battle we wanna fight.
[1:23:34] so to me, it's an absolute no brainer to do what it says. Sole purpose
[1:23:39] of removing violent criminals, not immigrants, violent
[1:23:44] criminals. Please pass this resolution. Thank you.
[1:23:51] after ms. Broker, we have chris ford, debbie claude
[1:23:56] cod, and sherry finn.
[1:24:01] well, good afternoon board. Um, my name is kristen broker.
[1:24:05] uh, I am the spouse of a navy veteran of
[1:24:09] 30 years. And, um, we started our
[1:24:14] service to the military here in
[1:24:18] san diego. Traveled the world four corners of the united states
[1:24:23] and, and finalized here and came back to a
[1:24:27] wonderful city, um, several years ago after my husband's
[1:24:31] retirement of 30 years. Um,
[1:24:35] mr. Wells, I wanna tell you, you are, uh, quite a celebrity
[1:24:40] from our peers in the military who are living elsewhere
[1:24:44] when they, you made national news and made the
[1:24:48] bold stance to bring this resolution to your city
[1:24:53] to protect your citizens. Um, for that, I commend you
[1:24:57] and your board for entertaining it and letting us as citizens
[1:25:01] come and be a part of the process. Um,
[1:25:06] I speak from, uh, only experience as
[1:25:11] a former federal corrections employee.
[1:25:15] and so my experience is
[1:25:19] when a violent criminal comes into the custody
[1:25:23] of any facility, penal system,
[1:25:28] a background check that is nationalized is done on
[1:25:32] that individual. If there is a detainer placed on that
[1:25:37] individual, it would be derelict of my duty as a federal
[1:25:41] employee of a correctional system to release them
[1:25:46] without checking with the agency to see if they wanna come and
[1:25:50] get that individual for further process. We're talking
[1:25:54] about criminals that are violent, whether
[1:25:58] their status is legal or illegal. Doesn't
[1:26:03] matter if I release them into the community.
[1:26:07] I'm sorry. Your time's up. Thank you. Okay, thanks.
[1:26:16] hello, my name is chris ford, district one. Good afternoon, counsel. I have some
[1:26:20] simple questions. Why are we all here again? Why are
[1:26:24] you wasting our time? And most importantly, did you take any notes from the last session
[1:26:28] regarding this topic? This and every version of this resolution has been opposed by
[1:26:32] a vocal majority of the community. Not only is it wholly unpopular and dangerous, it
[1:26:37] doesn't even make sense. You have spent nearly two months corresponding with
[1:26:41] the california attorney general because of the legal question. At the core of this resolution,
[1:26:45] you've spent five hours with the rest of us last time going back and forth on it, and you
[1:26:49] spent no who knows how much time talking behind closed doors, discussing amongst yourselves.
[1:26:54] and still, you don't have an answer as to the potential legal conflicts between state and federal
[1:26:58] law. Yet still, you want to put this weird statement of pseudo action on the
[1:27:02] books while seemingly admitting it could land the city in legal hot water. The next four
[1:27:06] years is going to be nothing but potential conflicts between the adversarial trump administration
[1:27:11] and the state of california. Are you going to put out a resolution
[1:27:15] every time that happens? How often do you plan to risk our city becoming
[1:27:20] publicly liable when instead, you could just be focusing on your job? Your job
[1:27:24] is not to embroil us in legal conflicts. Your job is to be stewards
[1:27:28] of the people of this city, both resident and non-resident alike. You say
[1:27:32] this is about public safety. While there's nothing stopping our police from dealing with allegedly violent
[1:27:37] criminals, both documented and undocumented, additionally, sb 54 already
[1:27:41] allows them at their discretion to transfer violent offenders if a judicial warrant
[1:27:45] is presented by ice. So where does your confusion lie?
[1:27:49] I don't think you're confused. I sorry. I don't think you're confused. I think this resolution
[1:27:53] just hates sanctuary cities. You shouldn't be worried about sanctuary cities. You should be worried
[1:27:57] about the federal government since the trump administration issued quotas to ice there, having reports
[1:28:02] of questioning or detainment of american citizens, veterans, indigenous people,
[1:28:06] and human beings whose only crime has been crossing the border, who wants that in their community?
[1:28:10] stop putting my neighbors at risk. Stop wasting our time. Kill this
[1:28:14] resolution and leave it dead. Thank you.
[1:28:30] uh, hello counsel. Thank you for being here. And thank you for letting us
[1:28:34] come. Um, I want to, oh, my name's debbie connell and I've been a
[1:28:38] resident for over 45 years raising my children here. I'm a great grandma.
[1:28:43] uh, I wanna support mayor bill wells, steve gobel, fill authorities, anybody else
[1:28:47] that really wants to be behind this recommendation
[1:28:52] in declaring the city's commitment to ensure public safety
[1:28:56] for all residents, not just different colors, but all residents.
[1:29:01] asserting the city's intent to comply with federal and immigration
[1:29:05] law complying I'm all for complying
[1:29:09] extent, permissible of the sole purpose of removing violent criminals from
[1:29:13] our community. Violent criminals. That's all we we ask for, to remove the violent
[1:29:17] criminals. Um, even less than 10 illegals
[1:29:22] would not be acceptable and should not be tolerated because
[1:29:26] of safety life or more important showing one's id legal
[1:29:30] status. I mean, that's the least we can do. Just show our
[1:29:35] id, show our legal status to make sure that there's some safety in our
[1:29:39] community. Please pass this resolution and
[1:29:43] uphold your oath of office. And thank you so much.
[1:29:51] after ms. Finn, we have truth. Brenda hammond and tony sat.
[1:29:58] good afternoon. My name is shari finn. Unlike many people in this room,
[1:30:02] I highly doubt there's one person in this room that can raise their hand and say that their
[1:30:06] child was raped and trafficked by an illegal immigrant who is
[1:30:10] sitting in the comfort of one of our prisons right now. He was not
[1:30:14] deported. I am asking you
[1:30:19] to pass this resolution because, well, there's many reasons.
[1:30:23] but rather than going out and spewing hate,
[1:30:27] what my husband and I did in an attempt to heal was create an organization
[1:30:32] that recovers missing and exploited children. And many of you up there
[1:30:36] know that we are
[1:30:40] often faced with lay persons,
[1:30:44] ourselves and our volunteers pulling children out of tents
[1:30:49] from sex offenders and traffickers, and having law
[1:30:54] enforcement showed up with their hands tied. Not, but four
[1:30:58] months ago, maybe four and a half months ago, my husband and I pulled a foster youth
[1:31:02] who had been pulled out of trafficking six separate times. My
[1:31:07] husband and I pulled her out of that tent down on eighth and e
[1:31:11] while san diego pd stood by to support just to make sure we
[1:31:15] didn't get hurt. The trafficker was not arrested, but the foster youth
[1:31:19] was taken away in handcuffs. Granted
[1:31:23] it was for her protection. They say our system is so broken,
[1:31:28] excuse me, on so many levels, there's a lot more work to be done.
[1:31:32] but right now, this is one step to help our officers
[1:31:37] when it comes to violent criminals and getting them off of our streets,
[1:31:42] period. It's a safety issue. And our officers
[1:31:47] need to be empowered to do their job.
[1:31:51] and this is just the beginning. This is just one issue where they need to be empowered.
[1:31:56] this is just one. Traffickers are still remaining on the streets because
[1:32:00] officers can't arrest them because they didn't see a physical exchange of money. Thank
[1:32:04] you. Yeah.
[1:32:19] all right. I agree that the city should declare itself not a sanctuary city, and that
[1:32:23] it will not obstruct, impede, interfere or block any federal law enforcement agency from its
[1:32:27] duties. There's nothing wrong with the city asking the united states attorney general to indemnify
[1:32:32] the city for following a federal immigration law by aiding in the removal
[1:32:36] of violent criminals. And I actually already heard the perspective argument
[1:32:40] today at the county meeting, that there's other issues to be concerned about in the
[1:32:44] city. But I ask, is there a more important issue than safety? I don't think so.
[1:32:48] but if this resolution were to pass, it must also be sent to the county since
[1:32:52] they actively pushed for a sanctuary city. And I know some people didn't
[1:32:56] understand when phil brought that fact up, but that's actually part of how we got here.
[1:33:01] supervisors, nora vargas, monica montgomery spp, and tara lawson reamer
[1:33:05] all voted yes to allow violent criminals to walk free among us, which is
[1:33:09] actually against state law. Sb 54. Last meeting, some
[1:33:13] speakers went as low ball and argument as to refer to the resolution as
[1:33:18] nazim. Well, I actually found steve and gary's narrow-minded view of immigrants
[1:33:22] as mere chief labor to also be a nazi like argument with the jews in
[1:33:26] the camps. All not also mere chief labor to their dictators.
[1:33:30] michelle's past argument included, we don't need this attention yet. The circus
[1:33:34] is something that you actually personally brought. And everybody saw it on the news. It
[1:33:38] was embarrassing bill said on nbc seven that he met with
[1:33:42] tom holman. So what was tom's or trump's statement on legal permissibility
[1:33:47] of following federal immigration law? Uh, please share with the class because
[1:33:51] sb 54 may not even be lawful under the national constitution. The federal government
[1:33:56] may actually openly challenge it. That would be the alleged federalism and
[1:34:00] action. Careful what you wish for. If el cajon or any city goes
[1:34:04] against federal law, then it's fair to ask if we can all pick and choose the federal laws we don't
[1:34:08] like. But in the end, none of this matters because nobody in
[1:34:12] the state is gonna make the final decision on immigration law. The federal government's
[1:34:16] gonna do whatever the federal government wants to do with our lives like they've been doing
[1:34:20] for decades. That's the reality we're all gonna have to deal with in the end. Thank you.
[1:34:33] do we have, uh, the next five? Uh, brenda hammond,
[1:34:37] tony sole, lisa gonzalez. Three. Okay.
[1:34:45] . Hello,
[1:34:49] brenda hammond. Um, some people think that just because I
[1:34:54] attend and speak up for public comment at lemon grove la mesa in el cajon and
[1:34:58] sometimes santee city council meetings that I agree with and
[1:35:02] stick up for all mayors and council members. I don't ask
[1:35:06] any of them. Um, today I listened to the concerns
[1:35:10] of this resolution at the noon media circus in front of city hall.
[1:35:15] I understand their concerns, but I also understand that they are
[1:35:19] being misinformed and instigated.
[1:35:23] one in particular is a doctor of psychology. Oh,
[1:35:28] I had to walk away when she claims she knew more about homeless people than the mayor.
[1:35:33] . Uh, I know more
[1:35:37] about homelessness than both of you put together .
[1:35:41] I'm just kidding with you. That's okay. And I will not
[1:35:45] repeat why. And you know why as I left that hot mess,
[1:35:50] I mentioned that the doctor needs to go back to school or be
[1:35:54] homeless for 15 years herself. She was saying some
[1:35:58] horrible things. Um, a phd is not,
[1:36:02] is a doctrine. It isn't, does not make you a doctor. It's
[1:36:07] a label and nothing more. In my experience, I have
[1:36:11] seen phd doctorates, especially in psychology,
[1:36:16] mess with people, even groups of people at a time for their
[1:36:20] own job security, especially those pop-up
[1:36:25] church ministers that call themselves doctors,
[1:36:31] mayors, mayor, city council and staff. I like
[1:36:35] the, I like the way this is worded. Um, this resolution is
[1:36:40] worded, it is clear and it protects the residents
[1:36:44] homeless or not. And the city I recommend it passes
[1:36:54] after ms. Gonzalez. We have maureen cruz, patty hannon,
[1:36:58] and emelda barranco. Good afternoon
[1:37:02] mayor, city council and fellow residents of el cajon.
[1:37:07] my name's lisa gonzalez and I'm a tax legal, tax paying resident of our city. Unlike
[1:37:11] thousands of others, voted to renew measure j to ensure funding for vital
[1:37:16] public safety services. I stand here today in support of
[1:37:20] the simple but essential principle that the interest and safety of our legal
[1:37:24] and tax paying citizens must come first. I strongly support
[1:37:28] allowing our el cajon police department to cooperate with federal law enforcement,
[1:37:32] specifically for the purpose of removing serious and violent offenders of our community.
[1:37:37] and this is simply common sense. Public safety is not
[1:37:41] a political issue. It's a fundamental responsibility of government. And yet, across
[1:37:45] california, misguided principles and policies are allowing
[1:37:49] violent criminals to remain in our communities, putting innocent people at risk.
[1:37:54] cities have been pressured to ignore laws designed to protect the public,
[1:37:58] creating an environment where lawlessness thrives and accountability is abandoned.
[1:38:02] and we see the result rising crime, shattered trust, and a sense of
[1:38:06] fear in residents who simply wanna live in safe neighborhoods.
[1:38:11] by passing this, it affirms our commitment to protecting law abiding taxpaying
[1:38:15] citizens, and ensuring that violent criminals are held accountable to the fullest
[1:38:19] extent of the law. So I urge the city council to support this resolution
[1:38:23] unequivocally. By doing so, you will send a clear message that el cajon will always
[1:38:28] prioritize the safety of its residents and lead the way for other cities
[1:38:32] that are ready to do the same. Thank you.
[1:38:42] hi, my name is patty hanan. I'd like to begin by thanking
[1:38:46] mayor wells and the city council members for all your
[1:38:50] hard work on to keep el cajon a vibrant
[1:38:55] and growing city. Thank you. Uh,
[1:39:00] I think that this resolution is very narrowly worded,
[1:39:04] so that it is to help police officers by
[1:39:08] removing the confusion that they can comply with
[1:39:12] federal officers, uh, for re
[1:39:16] removing violent criminals that helps our most
[1:39:21] vulnerable citizens. Right now we have fentanyl
[1:39:25] and human trafficking problems here in el
[1:39:29] cajon. Uh, we need safety for our residents
[1:39:33] and we need violent criminals, uh, to be removed,
[1:39:38] uh, with without, uh, any, any confusion
[1:39:42] as to, uh, whether they're allowed to be removed or not.
[1:39:47] uh, jesus and matthew 1225 said,
[1:39:51] a house divided against itself cannot stand.
[1:39:56] abraham lincoln also said that, uh,
[1:40:00] quoting jesus, uh, we can't be divided against
[1:40:05] the federal government when it wants to provide protection
[1:40:10] for our citizens. Uh, also the only
[1:40:14] thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to
[1:40:18] do nothing that was attributed to edmund burke, but it was actually
[1:40:22] john locke that said it. Looking the other way and not
[1:40:26] removing violent, violent criminals is evil.
[1:40:31] I'd like to give you the example of huntington beach, which in
[1:40:35] january voted seven to zero to comply with
[1:40:39] federal law. And they said the reason that they
[1:40:43] did that was for the safety of their citizens.
[1:40:47] so thank you. Huntington beach. Oh, sorry.
[1:40:51] thank you. Your time's finished. Thank you. And thank you,
[1:40:56] uh, city council.
[1:41:00] yes, ma'am.
[1:41:05] uh, good afternoon. Uh, thank you mayor wells
[1:41:09] and company bill ortiz. Graham
[1:41:14] mitchell, the city manager. Okay. I called,
[1:41:18] no, I called your office. Okay. I heard, um,
[1:41:23] two nights ago, pam bondy was on the news saying
[1:41:28] those that our sanctuary cities
[1:41:33] will not get any federal aid. I thought that was alarming.
[1:41:37] that's a lot of money. And I called your office and I asked, you know,
[1:41:41] about how much are we looking at? And they said, six or $7 million.
[1:41:46] and I'm thinking, okay, well
[1:41:51] I think that, um, what are they gonna cut
[1:41:55] out? Fire department, police protection,
[1:42:00] medical, you know, they're gonna have to cut. And I called
[1:42:04] my brother, who's a former, um, city manager because he
[1:42:08] has a good head and he said they're gonna take away,
[1:42:13] um, very important programs that people rely on.
[1:42:17] and I thought, that's not good. That is not good at all. So this sanctuary
[1:42:22] city issue is huge. It's bigger than any of us in
[1:42:26] here, I'm sure. And I, for one,
[1:42:30] you know, I want to see violent criminals go away. I don't want them
[1:42:34] in our city. And I also would like to see
[1:42:39] a crisis, a crisis line put in
[1:42:44] that people that are here that might be targeted would be able to call
[1:42:48] and get help. If they feel like there's bad cops
[1:42:53] and there's good cops. If they feel like the bad ones are harassing
[1:42:57] them, then they got, you know, they can talk to a spa, uh, spanish
[1:43:01] speaker or whatever and get some help and
[1:43:05] get some attention that they're not gonna just be thrown to the wind. And that
[1:43:09] was just my idea. I hope you've had the same idea. , thank
[1:43:13] you very much. Thank you.
[1:43:19] good afternoon. My name is barranco, and this, um, email
[1:43:23] I sent you, mr. Goble. Um, I don't know if you received it,
[1:43:27] but I'm gonna read it to you. Um, first
[1:43:31] of all, um, this, this is a little bit different. I got into the mind
[1:43:35] of mr. Bill wells. It's like kind of saying he wrote this email
[1:43:40] to you and this is how it goes. Hello, dear friend and colleague steve. Once
[1:43:44] again. I want to propose a solution to keep illegal criminals off the
[1:43:48] streets. My main concern is the safety of our residents.
[1:43:52] my resolution will allow ice to cooperate with local law en
[1:43:56] enforcement to help remove dangerous criminals off the streets. Ice can
[1:44:00] and has been targeting individuals that have dark skin. But that is not a concern for
[1:44:05] me. I don't mind that this resolution will build fear and distress among
[1:44:09] illegals rather than safety for all individuals of different ethnicities. After
[1:44:13] all, 57% of alcohol voted for trump. I care more,
[1:44:18] I care more about trump than the safety and wellbeing of alcohol residents who come
[1:44:22] from all walks of life. Please, please,
[1:44:26] let's help police remove illegals whose so legal status is no
[1:44:30] danger or threat to our communities. Police help the city of el cajon abide
[1:44:35] by a fa administration that is currently being protested in all
[1:44:39] 50 states. We do have a bigger problem in the city of el cajon like homelessness,
[1:44:43] but that is not a concern right now. Our country is being led by a greedy but
[1:44:47] successful businessman whom I fully support.
[1:44:51] so my question is just ask yourself if this is the
[1:44:55] solution, why you have so many people against it.
[1:45:01] that is it. Thank you for having me speak.
[1:45:10] mayor. Mayor, we have 19 more speakers. The next three
[1:45:14] are violet, patricia reon, and bob collins.
[1:45:41] good afternoon. Patricia monon, regional policy manager for alliance san diego.
[1:45:46] trump promised that ice would start by only removing violent criminals. That
[1:45:50] was a lie. And we have seen this lie play out in city after city
[1:45:55] where non offenders are being arrested and detained and fear and living
[1:45:59] in fear. Similarly, while mayor wells wants everyone to believe that this
[1:46:03] is about violent criminals, the data point of 647,000
[1:46:08] is mischaracterized by making people fearful, um, that
[1:46:12] there are high numbers of undocumented violent criminals in american cities.
[1:46:16] this is, this again, is simply not true. Dhs, which oversees
[1:46:21] ice has clarified that this number spans decades. And those not in ice custody
[1:46:25] may currently be incarcerated by federal, state, or local law enforcement, and
[1:46:29] includes immigrants with lawful status. Additionally,
[1:46:33] the single biggest category in this data point includes over 77,000 traffic
[1:46:37] related offenses. State law, sb 54, already allows
[1:46:41] for not removal of violent offenders. A position that governor
[1:46:46] newsom and ag bonta have affirmed. You do not have to go
[1:46:50] on record as being anti sanctuary as much as anti-immigrants
[1:46:54] would like to paint it. So the city of san diego, nor the county of san diego are sanctuary
[1:46:59] regions. So then what is the purpose of this? It's a political stunt.
[1:47:03] mayor wells told you two weeks ago that tom holman wants the city of el cajon
[1:47:07] in the trump column. It's also setting up the city of el cajon as a litigant
[1:47:12] to challenge state law. Requesting indemnification to the us
[1:47:16] attorney general is asking permission to violate state law and setting the city up for
[1:47:20] a long, costly battle on a federal issue. Resources and funds that are desperately
[1:47:24] needed for local issues. I urge you to think about the political
[1:47:28] waters you are wading into. In the example council member goebbels
[1:47:33] gave, that would be a violation of sb 54 as would asking ice to translate
[1:47:37] for police officer, police officers, which el cajon pd has done
[1:47:41] in the past. We urge a no vote and
[1:47:45] not to put the city of el cajon as a political pot. Thank you.
[1:47:55] um, after violet, we have bob collins, dr.
[1:47:59] se conti and jose cruz.
[1:48:15] boy, you guys had me studying.
[1:48:29] okay, whenever I'm ready. Yeah, go ahead. Yeah. Okay.
[1:48:34] hi city council. I'm not addressing the mayor who has been investigated
[1:48:38] by fp I'm good on that. I wanna address my city council,
[1:48:42] who means a lot to me because I live in the city and we have worked
[1:48:46] together. Um, and you guys said that we're not a sanctuary
[1:48:51] city, but yet in front of you, we see 400 plus
[1:48:56] violent sex offenders that reside here in el
[1:49:00] cajon. If nobody has seen it, this is the picture. This is only
[1:49:04] here in downtown. You guys need to make your research and see that
[1:49:08] we have violent criminals already here in el cajon that
[1:49:12] are not immigrants. Second of all,
[1:49:18] I spoke to the sheriffs today and they, um, communicated to me that we
[1:49:22] have a website where all the police departments,
[1:49:27] um, it's called crime watch. And on there we could
[1:49:31] see the statistics of our city and the crime that is being committed
[1:49:36] in our city on present time. It is right in
[1:49:40] front of you. As you could see, a lot of crimes are not violent. They
[1:49:44] are in-house, for example, a homeless problem that we
[1:49:49] as people have been working on. I could say that I have, because I've been to your
[1:49:53] town hall meetings plenty of times. My question is to you,
[1:49:58] why are we still considered the dump of san diego? Why are
[1:50:02] we still allowing this? Why are we entertaining this false lawless
[1:50:07] proposal that really is gonna get us into some deep s**t
[1:50:11] legal s**t that we're not gonna be able to get? You can help first that appreciate,
[1:50:16] sorry, mr. Gobel, you're
[1:50:20] an educator. Please educate yourself first,
[1:50:24] do not pass the proposal yet. Talk to your insurance
[1:50:28] carrier. Talk to people like, for example, the
[1:50:32] board of directors, the board of supervisors. Your time is up.
[1:50:36] how are we gonna wait, ma'am, you need to stop.
[1:50:40] I'll have removed from the chambers.
[1:50:54] yes, sir. All right. Ready to go? Yeah. Hello. Go
[1:50:58] ahead. Well, that's good seeing y'all. And michelle, I wanted to
[1:51:02] single you out for being as passionate as you were on
[1:51:07] this issue. And the same to you, gary. Um,
[1:51:11] I sort of got an idea what race discrimination was like as a kid.
[1:51:16] I grew up in a predominantly spanish american catholic church.
[1:51:22] the white population was only 10% of that church. And
[1:51:26] I carried around a target on my head and that image is
[1:51:30] not going away. So I can only imagine what the
[1:51:34] immigrant community is doing now. I was here at
[1:51:38] the last meeting. I heard about what you did at the first meeting, I guess third time's
[1:51:42] the charm. But the action you're gonna take today
[1:51:46] is divisive. It's not inclusive. And to the immigrant
[1:51:50] community, perception is reality. It's open season on them. Again,
[1:51:55] if they don't have their papers, they must be doing something wrong.
[1:52:00] do I carry papers? No, I don't have to. I'm white.
[1:52:05] and have you seen the films have been taken to these ice raids in
[1:52:09] other cities in the united states? I mean, it looks like the
[1:52:14] paratroopers have been dropped in and
[1:52:18] in this one raid they came up with a total of one. Now that
[1:52:22] ain't gonna make trump happy. He wants the quotas raised.
[1:52:26] and that's what my concern is. Although though this resolution
[1:52:30] be well may be well-meaning eventually it's gonna get to
[1:52:34] the point. Well, if you're not in the right, you know, uh,
[1:52:39] makeup and it looks like you might be not doing something right,
[1:52:43] we're gonna pull you over. But what I would say is, I know this thing's
[1:52:47] gonna pass, but why don't you do what you did with the homeless
[1:52:51] situations. You had forums where people could talk
[1:52:56] and if there's forums, you should be able to say going forward,
[1:53:00] just how effective is this policy and what impact is this having?
[1:53:05] am I up to two minutes? All right. Yeah, you are. Oh, I'm sorry. I had a lot more to say.
[1:53:10] I understand.
[1:53:18] after mr. Conti, we have jose cruz,
[1:53:22] paris ortiz, and fabiola conti. If you guys can please stand in the middle aisle.
[1:53:26] thank you.
[1:53:34] okay. Uh, my name is dr. Sergio conti. I am
[1:53:39] a resident cajon for district four .
[1:53:44] sorry. Okay. And, uh, let me start saying that
[1:53:48] undocumented people are human too. Okay?
[1:53:52] I want you understand that my life in
[1:53:56] cajon is, I like it. This is like a small war. You know, every monday
[1:54:01] I go to main street and I buy, uh, for my favorite middle
[1:54:05] eastern restaurant, the lamb czi delicious. On, on
[1:54:09] wednesday, I go to my, uh, market restaurant
[1:54:13] and main street too. And I like to buy iberia. And uh,
[1:54:18] this is el cajon. There are 70 communities, I believe gary
[1:54:22] say that living here. And I never saw a drug dealer. I
[1:54:26] don't know if I'm lucky or you know, I go to renet park every, uh,
[1:54:30] evening with my wife and little dog. And, uh, the arabs is,
[1:54:34] are, um, saluting us. You know, the rest, a lot children,
[1:54:39] children playing cricket, they came for afghanistan. You know, they play cricket. I don't know if you know that.
[1:54:43] and we didn't have it. We never have this problem until mr.
[1:54:48] uh, the mayor divide us. Now we are white again,
[1:54:52] brown people. And you know why this is happening. El cajon has
[1:54:56] 113 years, and in 113 years, we
[1:55:00] never have one council member who represent our community. We
[1:55:04] are the 25% of the voters of el cajon are spanish.
[1:55:09] everybody vote for mr. Ortiz. In the last election, I ask
[1:55:13] my neighbor, he's from mexico, I said, why you vote for mr. Ortiz? Oh, he's
[1:55:17] from mexico. He's not from mexico. He hate mexican people. And
[1:55:21] we are going to recall you in 90 days on march 10, we have
[1:55:26] the, the, the signature. You can't be there because you was elected
[1:55:30] for the latino community and you hate us. And the people
[1:55:34] are here. We just wanna work hard. We're
[1:55:39] not criminal, mr. We're not criminal.
[1:55:56] hello everyone. I'm here again. And I'm sad to say that I'm here again because
[1:56:01] we thought we had settled this two weeks ago, but apparently not.
[1:56:05] uh, I guess mr. Wells is getting a lot of pressure from upstairs, you
[1:56:09] know, the new, uh, president and, uh, he's caving in. And then,
[1:56:14] uh, and I feel for you, steve, I know I'm, I'm, I'm pretty sure you're getting a lot of nasty emails from
[1:56:19] a lot of our friends on this side of the aisle here. But, uh,
[1:56:24] I wanna say that this resolution is,
[1:56:28] you know, you claim it's all about criminals and this and that.
[1:56:33] why didn't you introduce this one, two or three years ago? You know, not until now, until
[1:56:37] we have a new precedent, which with a different agenda and everything else
[1:56:41] I have, I grew up, I grew up here in el cajon. And like I told
[1:56:45] you my story before as a 14-year-old, I, you know,
[1:56:50] we used to have a law here in el cajon exactly like what we wanna pass right now,
[1:56:54] where they would just pull you over 'cause you're brown. They would, the cops,
[1:56:58] the city police would pull you over and then they would call the border patrol,
[1:57:03] wait, wait couple hours until they show up or whenever they wanted to show up to
[1:57:07] ask you for your papers. And then just, you know, I know
[1:57:11] that's gonna happen. Again, I know the law that you wanna pass
[1:57:15] has good intentions. The, we already have a law where the police
[1:57:20] can turn over criminals of any kind, legal, illegal,
[1:57:25] whatever you wanna call them to the border patrol. So we, we already have something
[1:57:29] in place. So I don't see the need for this to happen. I know I'm gonna get
[1:57:33] discriminated again. Our community is not gonna be happy about it.
[1:57:37] if any cop pulls me over, ask me for my papers, I'm gonna tell 'em to go f themselves. And
[1:57:41] that's pretty much what I'm want to do. I don't wanna, I'm honestly don't wanna
[1:57:46] be put in that situation just because I'm a brown person. I'm a law abiding,
[1:57:50] uh, citizen of the united states, and I know my white friends
[1:57:54] don't understand it. 'cause they have never been discriminated in that sense. So I,
[1:58:06] so we, we have, we have paris ortiz,
[1:58:10] fale conti and tom galloway.
[1:58:16] and could you please state your name? Huh? Could you please state your name?
[1:58:20] paris ortiz , uh, hello.
[1:58:25] michelle tiz. Um, steve,
[1:58:29] I'm sorry, I don't know how to say your name. Kendrick bill weathers.
[1:58:34] um, vines. Vines vanes.
[1:58:39] um, I'm, I'm so sorry. Graham. Graham, okay.
[1:58:43] morgan, morgan, el and cortez. Yes.
[1:58:48] okay. Hi. First time. Never done this before.
[1:58:52] I'm a little scared. I only got, I only got one thing to say.
[1:58:57] I don't wanna take anybody's time.
[1:59:04] I had rather die on my knees than live on my knees.
[1:59:10] emilio, if you know what
[1:59:14] that means. . Yeah. Thank you so much. Yeah,
[1:59:19] I'm here.
[1:59:30] hi mayor. My name is faa conti. I'm a hospice nurse
[1:59:35] and a proud mexican. I care for patient of
[1:59:39] all races though 80% of my patients are on goza home
[1:59:44] and only 20% are latino. This is because
[1:59:48] my latino prefer to spend their time last, their last days with their families
[1:59:52] and do not sit hospice care her.
[1:59:57] I'm deeply proud of my work. Helping someone in the final days
[2:00:01] is a role that requires special training and compassion,
[2:00:06] which not too many possess here. It hurts me a lot
[2:00:10] to see the fear that has great latino families.
[2:00:14] and since president trump immigration, what is a crime?
[2:00:21] working hard to do the jobs that others want. The
[2:00:25] ones who repair the streets serves as a gardeners
[2:00:30] and serving the restaurant is often not mexicans
[2:00:35] streaming to provide for their families. They're working hard
[2:00:40] may walls. How can you sleep at
[2:00:44] night knowing the harm you are causing to the latino
[2:00:49] sinon? This is not what
[2:00:53] you elected, what we elected you for. A
[2:00:57] has the power to july for dubai and you have chosen
[2:01:02] division driving by head toward those with broken skin,
[2:01:07] sorry, with bone skin. Mr. Ortiz
[2:01:12] latino population elected you to be in this seat.
[2:01:16] yes. And you already saw division and I'm sorry, michelle. I'm sorry steve.
[2:01:20] and I'm sorry gary, because the last two weeks you received got hate that
[2:01:25] we always receive. It's what we are here and speaking out
[2:01:39] after, after mr. Galloway, we have linda,
[2:01:43] alicia, and sarah thought I lost
[2:01:47] my speech. Have you heard of 2 87
[2:01:52] g I've heard of 54 something, but
[2:01:56] 2 87 g sir, can you state in front of the microphone please?
[2:02:00] two eighty seven g is, is what you should be,
[2:02:06] as should, should be. Where you're, you're looking in the ins
[2:02:10] uh, rule books or laws actually. And mr. Foley has
[2:02:14] the actual section of the law. So
[2:02:18] 2 87 and this, how much of this do you have
[2:02:23] to pursue mass deportations?
[2:02:28] and it isn't just the money.
[2:02:32] some counties for their first year, and I think most
[2:02:37] of the county problems here spent 6.4
[2:02:41] to $4.8 million
[2:02:45] on their portion of, uh, 2 87
[2:02:50] g. They only thing that the federal government gives you
[2:02:55] is the training, the transportation to the training
[2:03:00] and the, uh, the equipment, the
[2:03:04] computer programming for that. Otherwise, it's all
[2:03:09] on the backs of the taxpayers in
[2:03:13] this city. Are these
[2:03:17] people gonna want you anymore? You know, I,
[2:03:21] I don't believe in, in a san sanctuary city. Um,
[2:03:25] I really believe in where the law ends, tyranny begins
[2:03:29] and if you follow the law, 2 2 87 g and
[2:03:34] whatever laws you have to look for, uh, what you're gonna be doing is
[2:03:39] doing regular pe police work and not
[2:03:43] sweeping, uh, areas and looking 'em
[2:03:47] up. Uh, you'll be deputized by the federal government
[2:03:52] and you can only do that. Uh,
[2:03:57] mr. Foley will probably have hundreds
[2:04:01] of, I'm sorry sir, your time. Okay. I hope,
[2:04:06] I hope you can hire him. Uh, some help in the future,
[2:04:10] sir. Thank you.
[2:04:19] could you please state, state your name for us? Miss?
[2:04:23] hi, I'm linda . Go ahead
[2:04:27] linda. Um, first of all, I'd like to address, uh, their bill wells
[2:04:31] publicly. Um, thank you for voting against the
[2:04:36] sanctuary city. I oppose sanctuary cities and I know there's a few other of
[2:04:40] your colleagues that opposed it. Thank you. Anybody else up here
[2:04:44] on city council that would like to have it? A sanctuary city should be
[2:04:48] arrested for defying president donald trump's orders. I'm mexican
[2:04:53] american, third generation from hearing. As you can see, I brought old glory
[2:04:57] 'cause she's been through a lot. My whole family has fought in,
[2:05:01] uh, world war I, world war ii, korea, vietnam,
[2:05:05] and my son's in the army. And um, you know, I just wanna say that
[2:05:10] I as a mexican here, I don't feel any hate. I
[2:05:14] don't feel anybody's against me. You know, I thank you for making
[2:05:18] us safe. And, um,
[2:05:22] I have a few more minutes. Let me see my notes.
[2:05:31] let see. I see, I see.
[2:05:40] oh, all my family came here legally and it took a long time and
[2:05:45] everybody should come here legally. Anybody that comes here illegally is a criminal
[2:05:50] and should be set back.
[2:05:56] and I'm not racist. I'm a mexican, but I'm american by blood.
[2:06:01] yes, me hang, glory on
[2:06:05] me,
[2:06:10] lays and gentlemen. Let her speak. It's her time. Anybody
[2:06:14] that wants to protest and burn our flag should be
[2:06:18] arrested also.
[2:06:25] and last but not least, this, uh, this is american soil
[2:06:29] and will always be american soil. Thank you. Your time's up, ma'am. Thank you.
[2:06:34] thank you.
[2:06:47] hello mayor in city councils. Um, good evening.
[2:06:55] I just wanted, my name is alicia. I'm a chicana,
[2:06:59] born and raised here, a third generation born from a legal immigrant
[2:07:03] mom. My grandparents came from mexico with my mother when
[2:07:07] she was five years old. And all her 14 brothers and sisters
[2:07:12] entered the usa legally. I have uncles
[2:07:16] and and nephews who served in the military for this country,
[2:07:20] but those who are rioting destroying property and burning the
[2:07:25] american flag do not represent me. Such disrespect to our
[2:07:29] military men and women, my family who served, and especially
[2:07:33] the ones who their lives protecting the american people.
[2:07:37] I agree with president trump, you the american flag. You should go to jail for one
[2:07:42] year. And what's embarrassing is
[2:07:46] those waving mexican flags. Can someone explain?
[2:07:51] everybody yelling mexico, but still crying and
[2:07:55] fighting not to go back and wanna be american citizens. Make
[2:07:59] it make sense? Ladies and gentlemen,
[2:08:04] come in the legal way and get in line. I love my god first, but I also love
[2:08:08] this nation, this country that has given me so much. I can only be thankful
[2:08:12] for all the opportunities and blessings, but we need
[2:08:16] help to get all violent, illegal criminals out of our city and nation. We are
[2:08:20] tired, our families are not safe. Human trafficking and crimes are all
[2:08:24] time high. I agree and support our mayor bill wells on no
[2:08:28] sanctuary cities. If police encount, illegal, violent
[2:08:32] criminals, police should be able to notify ice immediately.
[2:08:36] please, everyone here in the city council, do your job.
[2:08:41] protect the american people. You got, you got voted in
[2:08:45] for, to protect the american people and do what the american people
[2:08:49] are asking you to do. You see the violence going on? I see
[2:08:53] it through mike. I see it through my, okay, ladies and gentlemen, stop.
[2:08:58] ladies and gentlemen. Alright,
[2:09:02] we're gonna take a, a three minute break until you guys can get, get it
[2:09:06] together and not interrupt this. And I'll, I'll continue to break all night long till
[2:09:11] six in the morning if that's what we have to do. But I am not going to put up with you disrupting
[2:09:15] these proceedings. Thank you. And god bless america.
[2:09:22] I think it's gonna go longer.
[2:09:28] ladies, I would like to attempt to continue meeting
[2:09:32] if you could all take your seats and
[2:09:37] be silent.
[2:09:44] the next speakers are sarah, uh,
[2:09:50] rado and eva pacheco, if you can please come down the aisle.
[2:09:59] yeah,
[2:10:09] good evening. Ready?
[2:10:13] okay. Too bad some of the people are out of here that can't hear what's really
[2:10:17] needs to go on. I was here. This is my second visit here
[2:10:22] for the, this is my second visit here. Last time I
[2:10:26] did not speak, I thought it was very important and I
[2:10:30] wanted to, um, touch on some things that I've learned in just this two weeks.
[2:10:34] but at first I would like to address my situation I had with
[2:10:38] ms. Michelle. And if I hear any remarks,
[2:10:43] you can leave . No, mr. Wells,
[2:10:47] this is when the, they need to keep control because it's between me and her, and
[2:10:51] actually her. Let's, let's go ahead and get started. Yeah.
[2:10:56] anyways, I will look and I will say whatever, 'cause that's who I am.
[2:11:01] bottom line is ms. Michelle, 'cause I can't pronounce her last name. Mitchell,
[2:11:05] how do you pronounce your last name? Mitchell. Mitchell. I'm
[2:11:09] sure you're aware of what happened and you don't want it to be known, but when
[2:11:13] I spoke with you after this meeting, I just want the counsel to know I'm, I have to speed it up 'cause I have a
[2:11:18] lot to say. Your per unprofessionalism and your
[2:11:22] inability to protect me. After asking a question and hearing
[2:11:26] people laugh about the first speaker that spoke on you, it's all true.
[2:11:30] what happened? You did complain about being tired. You
[2:11:34] needed to eat, you wanted to go home, you have menopause.
[2:11:39] and too many people are talking and asking questions. And I personally said
[2:11:44] it is, it does have everything to do with her being coherent. Ma'am. Enough to be,
[2:11:48] ma'am, you just, just address the counsel. Ladies and gentlemen, I need you to have
[2:11:52] the attention dropped. Hold on one second. Okay? Stop it. I'm gonna give you, I'm gonna give you some more time.
[2:11:56] ladies and gentlemen, you have got to control yourself or you are not gonna get through this meeting until
[2:12:01] tomorrow. I ma'am
[2:12:05] it's not your time to speak except for business lines. Everybody gets a chance to
[2:12:09] speak so we can do, we can do this however y'all
[2:12:13] wanna do it, but I am not gonna let you run the meeting.
[2:12:17] so why don't we just let everybody have their chance to speak? Sometimes people
[2:12:22] are gonna say things you don't like. Sometimes people are gonna say things
[2:12:26] they don't like. It's, it's just the way it goes. So let's
[2:12:30] continue and I'll I'll give you 10 more seconds or so at the end.
[2:12:35] I'll wait. Go ahead. Can you correct it? Wait, she can't,
[2:12:39] she doesn't have the ability to do that. So I'll, I like to address that as a board member and any
[2:12:43] council, you should be able to be aware of what's gonna be happening and not take favoritism.
[2:12:48] I see a lot of favoritism. I see a lot of people signing to you and to the
[2:12:52] board. Not this board, but last board. I see a lot of unprofessional
[2:12:58] behavior. And if the job for you is to protect all of us,
[2:13:02] not just certain people. That's what I'm addressing today. I had more to say
[2:13:07] and maybe I'll come back and speak about it. Period. No, she gets a few more minutes,
[2:13:11] few more seconds because you interrupted her. So you can take 15 more seconds if you'd like.
[2:13:15] I have a lot to say. Maybe I'll come back. But as far as this, this whole
[2:13:19] thing goes, I think that everybody should know that their vote today, or what
[2:13:24] it is about today means the future for our children, for all
[2:13:28] the criminals that are out there. We need to be safe no matter what color we are.
[2:13:32] no matter where you come from, period. And not have favoritism to a group.
[2:13:38] I be back in five minutes. We can calm down.
[2:13:42] oh, . Um, gary's,
[2:13:48] I continue meeting.
[2:13:53] the good news is that we're down to the last, hey,
[2:13:59] it's the hyundai speakers. We have left, sir, we have nine more speakers. Okay,
[2:14:03] we have nine more speakers. That's 18 minutes of speaking.
[2:14:07] and the, the meeting could be done pretty quickly and we could, uh, go about our lives.
[2:14:12] but we have, we have have to have the quorum.
[2:14:17] so I'm gonna continue again. Who's our next speaker? Um,
[2:14:21] and I'm sorry, I know I'm saying this name wrong. Rado
[2:14:26] eva pacheco and jesus pacheco.
[2:14:32] councilman city members. I am here
[2:14:36] today. My name's rado. I skipped school. I called
[2:14:40] off work. I came down here, drove an hour with my friends.
[2:14:46] I want to challenge the hateful rhetoric that has been spread throughout
[2:14:50] this meeting and throughout the wording of the,
[2:14:54] um, constellation in may, 2021.
[2:14:59] my father, an illegal immigrant died due to complications
[2:15:03] relating to diabetes. He died of a heart attack. And the reason
[2:15:08] I bring this up was because I was not able to spend time with him.
[2:15:12] and he was not able to get proper healthcare because he was afraid of
[2:15:16] the, of getting profiled as a violent criminal. That
[2:15:20] these individuals throughout this meeting have been calling
[2:15:25] immigrants. The truth of the matter is we are not
[2:15:30] criminals. And the biggest part, and something that really just
[2:15:34] hurt me was in this text you called us illegal aliens. You
[2:15:39] are telling us to calm down and to to be respectful in the very
[2:15:43] writing you are calling us dehumanizing language
[2:15:47] aliens. Aliens, not some things of, not of
[2:15:51] this world. It's so
[2:15:55] heartbreaking as a youth. And a lot of the people,
[2:16:00] a lot of the youth that have came here today have spoken out about this consolation
[2:16:04] and I I'm just how trying
[2:16:09] to reach you as a human being. How could you treat us? Kids like me
[2:16:13] who are separated from their fathers and their mothers as aliens,
[2:16:17] treating their, their fathers and mothers as violent criminals. I'm
[2:16:21] not a criminal, I'm a human. I have flesh and blood like you
[2:16:26] viza.
[2:16:41] here we go again for the third time.
[2:16:46] and I would like mr. Gobel to be there because I really want
[2:16:50] to talk to him. It's okay. He he needs to do something. So,
[2:16:54] oh, he's coming back. Okay, he's coming. He needs to be because
[2:16:58] I, I, I really, ladies and gentlemen, I'm time over
[2:17:02] ladies and gentlemen. I do not wanna hear you calling out from the gallery.
[2:17:07] we will stop again. I can do this all night.
[2:17:11] if you can't behave, I'm gonna take the meeting up to the fifth floor. We'll invite the
[2:17:15] press and we'll leave you out of it. 'cause you can't behave.
[2:17:20] so this, this is the warning. I'm not, I'm not kidding around with
[2:17:24] you. I'm happy to let you speak, but you gotta be respectful
[2:17:28] now. Everybody's here. Please start our time over. Let's let her have the whole time.
[2:17:36] do you know council members? Um, I've been praying for you. I really
[2:17:40] do because we are here again
[2:17:44] for this. The same situation.
[2:17:49] there is no need for a resolution. Mr.
[2:17:53] wills no need.
[2:17:58] you very proud said I am.
[2:18:02] I'm doing this because I need to respond to the people
[2:18:06] who voted it for me. But you are the mayor
[2:18:11] of el cajon. You represent, you represent
[2:18:15] us. Even I didn't vote for you.
[2:18:20] the only thing that I can say in my community,
[2:18:24] what you have created is hate,
[2:18:29] despair, division. That's what you have created
[2:18:34] with this resolution that is nothing else
[2:18:38] but your political career because you really
[2:18:43] said that you met with to tom hoas. You
[2:18:47] have to keep your commitment to him to
[2:18:51] cooperate with eyes. That's what it is. And
[2:18:55] who's and who you are targeting the latino
[2:18:59] community. And we are already seeing mr.
[2:19:04] gobel, I'm sorry that you change your
[2:19:08] mind and you change your position, but I can tell you
[2:19:14] this is not good for you. And everyone
[2:19:18] here came to this country illegally.
[2:19:22] everyone but the native, native
[2:19:26] american, we are in a land of indigenous people.
[2:19:31] and that's what we are sitting right now.
[2:19:35] this land belongs to everyone. Thanks ma'am. Your time is up. Thank you.
[2:19:50] hi all city council. Um, uh,
[2:19:55] obviously, you know, uh, many of
[2:19:59] us believe that the resolution, uh, there is
[2:20:03] no purpose of the resolution because there is rule regulations and laws they addressed
[2:20:08] that concerns all of us. Um,
[2:20:13] but secondly is not good this resolution because
[2:20:17] brings, uh, division and tension
[2:20:22] among us as evidently I witnessed
[2:20:26] that last, uh, at the last council meeting outside.
[2:20:32] but I cannot assure, uh, michelle, that
[2:20:36] we respect you because you are
[2:20:41] taking a position of to serve the
[2:20:45] entire community no matter what. Maybe
[2:20:50] there is some disagreements, but
[2:20:54] eh, justice will prevail and we stand
[2:20:59] behind you a hundred percent. Thank
[2:21:03] you for represent us that community. Thank you.
[2:21:08] yes.
[2:21:14] the next three speakers, the next three speakers are gambler,
[2:21:19] matthew gordon and patrick hartley.
[2:21:32] let's go to the next one.
[2:21:38] I don't think mr. Gambler's here. He's
[2:21:43] go ahead sir. And if you can please state your name. Oh, there, go, go ahead
[2:21:47] sir. Yeah. Good evening. Mayor wells,
[2:21:52] uh, council members. Uh, my name is matthew gordon. I'm district director
[2:21:56] here on behalf of state assembly member dr. Lashay sharp
[2:22:00] collins. Um, I'm here to read,
[2:22:05] start the time. Oh, I'm here to read a couple of, uh, brief,
[2:22:10] uh, remarks. And I'll be speaking, uh, against the
[2:22:14] resolution. Uh, as the assembly member
[2:22:18] representing our diverse communities, I commend your willingness to revisit this matter
[2:22:22] and appreciate the opportunity to share my perspective. California
[2:22:27] has a long tradition of standing for dignity and wellbeing of every
[2:22:31] individual, regardless, regardless of their place of birth.
[2:22:36] sb 54 continues that tradition by clarifying the role of local law
[2:22:40] enforcement, cultivating trust, and remaining committed to inclusion
[2:22:45] in el cajon. Many families, immigrant and non-immigrant
[2:22:50] alike work hard each and every day to build better lives
[2:22:54] by promoting policies that respect and protect all residents.
[2:22:59] we send a message that every person in our community has worth
[2:23:03] and is deserving of security and opportunity. I recognize
[2:23:07] that issues related to immigration can spark strong emotions,
[2:23:11] yet at their core, these are human stories about families determined to
[2:23:15] provide for their children. Young people striving to contribute to
[2:23:19] the city that they call home. And neighbors whose cultures and experience enrich
[2:23:24] the very fabric of our neighborhoods. When we foster trust and
[2:23:28] security among all residents, we build safer, stronger neighborhoods.
[2:23:33] it is only through empathy and the collaboration rather than fear
[2:23:37] that we can truly harness the pot, the potential of this city's
[2:23:41] diversity. By moving forward with an inclusive perspective, el cajon has
[2:23:45] the opportunity to shine as a community that welcomes every individual
[2:23:50] and offers a fair chance for all to succeed. Thank you for your
[2:23:54] consideration and for your commitment to serving all residents of
[2:23:59] el cajon. I stand ready to work with you to
[2:24:03] foster a future that reflects our shared values of dignity, dignity,
[2:24:07] respect, and opportunity for every person in our community.
[2:24:24] um, thank you, honorable mayor and, uh, city council.
[2:24:29] um, unfortunately, voting no on this proposal does not
[2:24:33] get ice out of our community. Ice is already in this community.
[2:24:37] ice can and will continue to operate in el cajon, but we don't need our
[2:24:41] police officers collaborating with ice to terrorize our residents.
[2:24:45] state and local police still enforce state and local law
[2:24:49] criminal laws against anyone. Even in california, local law enforcement is
[2:24:54] directed to notify ice. If the defendant is convicted of a violent crime.
[2:24:58] officials still send fingerprints of anyone arrested to the fbi, which
[2:25:02] the fbi can choose to share with ice. Nearly all of california cities
[2:25:07] and counties are complying with state law, which makes it illegal
[2:25:11] for them to assist ice. I urge you to
[2:25:15] vote no on this xenophobic resolution.
[2:25:19] immigrants contribute a hundred billion to the american economy in 2022.
[2:25:23] that's from bloomberg, 8.7 billion in california.
[2:25:28] the lady early, earlier claimed that she saw a bus full of military age
[2:25:32] men. That's fear-mongering. Did they do do anything to her?
[2:25:36] did they say anything? Did you talk to them? Did did they make you feel
[2:25:40] fear or did they just make you feel uncomfortable? You have the right,
[2:25:45] you don't have the right to intellectual safety. The first amendment doesn't protect
[2:25:49] from being uncomfortable just because people of a different color or different
[2:25:53] religion or different nationality or have different opinions make you uncomfortable,
[2:25:58] does not violate any laws. People out here are talking
[2:26:02] about they need protection. Protect you from what people who just want to go
[2:26:06] to school protect you from going to work to jobs. That, let's be honest, most
[2:26:11] white people won't do themselves. Everyone is complaining about people
[2:26:15] coming here from certain countries because america
[2:26:19] destabilizes and assassinates leaders in most, in those countries, we're
[2:26:23] not willing to omi. But we don't want to have that conversation. We'd rather it's
[2:26:27] easier to blame americans. Problems on. Thank you, sir. I appreciate it.
[2:26:32] thank you
[2:26:43] gambler here. I understand our elections have been screwed
[2:26:48] up for a very long time, which allowed you guys to go ahead and fight with the federal government.
[2:26:53] I actually don't care if you guys go ahead and tell
[2:26:57] all the police officers not to communicate with life because actually that
[2:27:01] will help out in deporting people because we won't
[2:27:05] be deporting them from the prison. We'll be deporting them from houses.
[2:27:10] and this is exactly what everyone here that is protesting wants.
[2:27:15] they want the cops to go to a household and make
[2:27:19] a scene so that we could go ahead and further divide our
[2:27:23] nation. And that is what you guys have been doing for the past, what, four
[2:27:28] years until suddenly donald trump becomes president. And then you have
[2:27:32] a moral epiphany that you guys all of a sudden
[2:27:36] have ball to go ahead and say something. Well, I've
[2:27:40] been saying s**t to the point that the county has thrown me in jail because I want to talk
[2:27:44] about election fraud and they don't want to talk about it. I've asked you to go ahead and look
[2:27:48] into the election fraud that is coming from homeless facilities that you
[2:27:53] ran around and grabbed from all over the county in 2020.
[2:27:57] I know you did that. You told all of san diego that bring you the
[2:28:01] homeless. So why did you do that? So that you can make sure that you keep your seat
[2:28:05] by registration voter fraud so that you could go ahead and push these,
[2:28:10] this division that we have. Is that the reason? Because
[2:28:15] you're just phony right now. You
[2:28:19] recognize that, right? You recognize that we could look back in the past three, four or four years and
[2:28:23] see the fact that you supported most of this s**t, that you went ahead and went
[2:28:27] along with these ideas, that you went ahead and tried to go ahead and
[2:28:31] make a friendly bike lane in front of a frigging hell's angels bar so that
[2:28:35] you could have fights out in front of that, shortening out the speed
[2:28:39] so that we could go ahead and have traffic p**s off people so that we start getting angry at
[2:28:44] each other. These are actions that you thanks mr. Gammar, appreciate it.
[2:28:53] um, before I called the last three speakers, we did receive seven
[2:28:57] emails, which I did forward to you. Six were against, and one
[2:29:01] in support of the post. Thank, thank you. I appreciate it. And the last three speakers
[2:29:05] are elena clemente, jose una, and
[2:29:09] jim uribe
[2:29:19] will not be speaking. Elena. Okay. Elena will not be speaking. So
[2:29:24] if mr. Jose kuna and jim uribe could please come down.
[2:29:33] hi, my name is jose. I'm a proud us citizen. I'm a proud immigrant.
[2:29:37] I came to this country at three years old and it's been a journey defined by hard work, but also luck.
[2:29:42] I was lucky my father was giving a visa to enter and I was lucky he was sponsored over his green card.
[2:29:46] but it was hard work that admitted me to great schools and hard work that enables me to write code
[2:29:50] shipped to billions of people more. I mo most immigrants love this
[2:29:54] country and would love to come here legally, but many are not so fortunate.
[2:29:59] without said luck, I could easily be seen as an enemy, as an illegal who didn't
[2:30:03] do things the right way. Had I not secured citizenship before this administration
[2:30:07] and the resolution being proposed today, a single call to ice a single accusation
[2:30:12] would've been disastrous. We all know that detention camps abroad are not meant to
[2:30:17] empower due process. The law is already written to hold undocumented
[2:30:21] immigrants accountable. If they break the law, they can be arrested, prosecuted
[2:30:25] and deported. Strengthening law, law enforcement, local law enforcement, ties to
[2:30:29] ice will not improve safety, which is something we all want, but will not be
[2:30:34] achieved through the resolution. Your intent is to target violent criminals. And the
[2:30:38] reality is a yes vote will only hurt innocent lives, spread fear
[2:30:42] and divide communities. We need policies that foster unity and not suspicion
[2:30:47] the proposed changes would needlessly hurt and already marginalized community of law
[2:30:51] abiding immigrants who simply haven't had the chance to be, uh, chance
[2:30:55] to be on a given pathway to legal status. Yet, because us immigrants
[2:31:00] documents or undocumented are not the enemy, statistically we commit crimes
[2:31:04] at a lower rate to the non-immigrants. We are hard workers who just want to give
[2:31:08] our children the opportunities we didn't have ourselves. And I asked the council,
[2:31:13] how is that so different than how you guys live your lives? I urge you to vote no on the
[2:31:17] resolution. Thank you.
[2:31:29] well, sir, council members, uh, first of all, I
[2:31:33] do support the, uh, proposed resolutions. However, I do wish that
[2:31:37] there had been a change and that change would've been in that first section,
[2:31:42] which reads, uh, city intends to follow,
[2:31:46] uh, federal law. It should have said the city
[2:31:50] will make an effort in following the law, the federal
[2:31:55] law. Now, I was brought up where the, uh,
[2:31:59] federal law supersedes, uh, state and local laws.
[2:32:03] and this was brought up in our constitution in article
[2:32:07] six, uh, paragraph to where the, uh, federal
[2:32:11] law supersedes the other laws in the land.
[2:32:15] um,
[2:32:20] now I'm not an attorney, but I know how to read the law. Uh, senate
[2:32:24] bill, uh, 54th, I believe needs to
[2:32:28] be tested in the courts, uh, system.
[2:32:33] um, I believe that this is not a legal issue. We,
[2:32:37] we all know the law. It's not a legal issue, but
[2:32:41] it's a social issue. Now, I've been, I've lived in the
[2:32:45] city of el cajon for over 50 years. I know there's a lot of, uh,
[2:32:50] turmoil and social issues, but this is not a
[2:32:54] legal issue. Thank you. Thank you. Questions.
[2:32:58] thank you, sir. Mayor,
[2:33:03] mayor, with your permission, if we could call one speaker who was called before, um,
[2:33:07] but she missed her opportunity to speak. Okay. And that's the last one though. Okay. This is the last
[2:33:11] one. Julianne gustafson. Hi. Thank you
[2:33:16] very much for allowing me to speak. My name is julianne gustafson
[2:33:20] lira. Uh, in 1931,
[2:33:25] uh, mexicans were rounded up from hospitals,
[2:33:30] cities, homes. They, they went out
[2:33:34] to the fields, they picked the people up, they
[2:33:38] summarily put them in in box cart,
[2:33:42] in, in trucks, and they trucked them summarily to
[2:33:47] mexico primarily. Those were the ones that were, uh,
[2:33:51] uh, pointed at as, uh, having being
[2:33:56] too many here or having problems, or giving problems to the
[2:34:00] people. Anyway, uh, one of 'em was my grandfather.
[2:34:04] he was, uh, taken out of the hospital, sent to mexico
[2:34:08] city. He wasn't from mexico city. Um, my grandmother,
[2:34:13] uh, despairing, she went after him with my mother
[2:34:17] and my aunt. Both of them were born in the united states. One
[2:34:21] of 'em was in 1923, the other one was in 1926.
[2:34:26] they have been here. They had been here since 1915. What
[2:34:30] I'm trying to say is that, uh, uh, people that
[2:34:34] do not learn history and do not remember history,
[2:34:39] it will be, it will be, uh, as we can see,
[2:34:43] it'll be done again. And we need to learn from that. Uh, it's
[2:34:47] kind of interesting to, um, say that
[2:34:51] federal law trumps, uh, state laws
[2:34:55] when it is, uh, to our convenience and when we wanna pass something.
[2:34:59] we returned back to this country in 1954
[2:35:04] and we have prospered. That's all I have to say. Thank
[2:35:08] you.
[2:35:18] was there any more? No more, sir. Okay.
[2:35:23] back to the city council. Um, open to discussion,
[2:35:28] mr. Garrett. Uh, question for the city attorney.
[2:35:33] uh, sb 54 was challenged in
[2:35:37] federal court, uh, back in 2017,
[2:35:42] I think. Uh, and could you
[2:35:46] tell us a little bit about that? I will
[2:35:50] try the ss yes. Sb 54 was challenged, um, by
[2:35:54] the federal government and in a federal court here in,
[2:35:58] um, california. And I got
[2:36:03] a lot of feedback apparently. But, um, the case ended
[2:36:07] up through district court, uh, being ruled, um,
[2:36:11] constitutional, uh, with certain limitations. There were, there was
[2:36:15] a portion of, lemme take it back. There were three laws that were challenged at the same time,
[2:36:19] all related to similar immigration issues. Um,
[2:36:25] after the district court made its decision that the, uh, ninth circuit court
[2:36:30] panel, uh, affirmed the, uh,
[2:36:35] constitutionality of sb 54 in the light of the challenge by the us government
[2:36:39] and the us government petition for, um, review by the
[2:36:44] us supreme court. And that was denied. So
[2:36:48] the, the ninth circuit law for us
[2:36:52] is at sb 54 is legal. So
[2:36:56] the federal court said it is legal and that's
[2:37:00] the law of the land in california. Yeah, they said
[2:37:04] that the, um, there were a lot of arguments made by the us government.
[2:37:08] uh, one was a supremacy clause of the us constitution.
[2:37:13] we've heard that, uh, being used in this, these proceedings.
[2:37:17] the court found that, um, that that did not apply.
[2:37:21] it applied to immigration law itself, but does not apply
[2:37:25] to state laws that aren't in conflict with that, uh,
[2:37:30] that, uh, federal law and went to great,
[2:37:34] a great amount of detail to describe how that did not apply in
[2:37:38] this case. And, uh, that helped to affirm,
[2:37:42] um, the, uh, validity of sb 54.
[2:37:46] there was, there was a, there was a description of violations of
[2:37:51] the constitution of, of, um, if, if it, if
[2:37:55] the us government could, could
[2:38:00] place its, well if the uf us government could take its position that the supremacy
[2:38:04] clause allowed them to seek the cooperation and assistance of
[2:38:09] law enforcement agencies, which sb 54 said, no, that's
[2:38:13] not what's gonna happen. Uh, and the,
[2:38:17] um, the court found that the 10th amendment against come, uh,
[2:38:21] commandeering. In other words, the separation of powers between the
[2:38:25] state and federal governments, uh, provides that the, the feds
[2:38:29] can't step into the state's business, the local government
[2:38:34] and the state's businesses and, uh, that are reserved to the states under
[2:38:38] the constitution. Okay. Um,
[2:38:43] but again, that's the law of the land. What sb 54
[2:38:47] and, uh, question
[2:38:51] for the city manager, if this resolution passes,
[2:38:57] what would be different in that, what we would do in, uh, ordering
[2:39:02] the police procedures and policy?
[2:39:06] so, so as, you know, in a council manager form of government, the city council establishes
[2:39:10] policy and the city manager and staff then, um, administer
[2:39:15] that policy or, or implement that policy. The, on
[2:39:19] a day-to-day function, our operations wouldn't change with or without the
[2:39:24] resolution. But with a lot of resolutions, there's some value in at least staff
[2:39:28] understanding the policy description of the, or the policy direction
[2:39:32] of the council, especially 'cause we can foresee some parts of
[2:39:36] sb 54 being challenged. We can see that this conflict between the state and federal government
[2:39:41] becoming more embroiled and more complicated. So having an understanding of where the
[2:39:45] council feels about it has some value to us. But
[2:39:49] on a day-to-day operation, uh, we don't change the way we operate
[2:39:53] tomorrow if this passes today. Okay. And, uh,
[2:39:58] question for the city attorney. Uh, there was some mis misinformation
[2:40:02] to distributed saying that we were a sanctuary city.
[2:40:06] are we a sanctuary city? No, we have
[2:40:10] never. In the 25 years I've been the ladies
[2:40:14] and gentlemen. Ladies and gentlemen, please. In the nearly 25 years that I have been
[2:40:19] city attorney, not once has the council adopted a resolution
[2:40:23] ordinance or anything else policy that says that the city is a
[2:40:27] sanctuary city. Okay, thank you.
[2:40:32] oh, I I do have one more question, uh,
[2:40:37] for either the city manager or uh, city attorney,
[2:40:41] which whichever one of you feel is most appropriate to answer
[2:40:45] it. Our police are certified by the state,
[2:40:50] aren't they? Through post they
[2:40:54] receive a post cer certification. Yes. So
[2:40:58] if a police officer, uh,
[2:41:03] violate sb uh, 54, uh,
[2:41:07] is it possible that their certification could be removed and
[2:41:12] they can't be a police officer in the state of california anymore?
[2:41:19] as I recall, the state has the ability to prosecute police officers.
[2:41:23] I don't recall what that potential punishment includes. Does it
[2:41:28] include decertify de certifying them with their post certificate?
[2:41:33] there may be a provision in there. I know some council members spend a lot of time looking at
[2:41:37] sb 54 2. Um, so I don't know if the answer to that, but I could find it by the end of
[2:41:41] the meeting. Okay, thank you. Anybody
[2:41:45] else? Oh, I do have, I'll say one other thing.
[2:41:50] and this is in defense of michelle mitchell, who I've been talking to a lot
[2:41:54] about this. I just want to tell you some of
[2:41:58] the messages that were left on
[2:42:02] michelle, I can only talk to one other council member about this issue. So
[2:42:07] I don't know if steve got these or not, but I'm just gonna
[2:42:11] read some excerpts from this, from some of the phone messages
[2:42:15] I got on my city, uh, phone line.
[2:42:21] I'm not gonna read it all 'cause it is so profane.
[2:42:25] uh, it's, it just disgusting. So I'm gonna just take some excerpts.
[2:42:32] hi gary. You're a retarded fat piece of s and I'm gonna make sure
[2:42:36] that everyone knows about that vote you made. Uh,
[2:42:41] why did you vote? Here's another one. Why did you vote no to get
[2:42:45] rid of all the dirty stinking illegal aliens?
[2:42:50] they cause problems.
[2:42:56] the majority. Here's another one. The majority of you are traitors to this
[2:43:00] country and all your information is public.
[2:43:07] uh, you are a retarded people who causing permanent damage
[2:43:11] to everybody around you through your ignorant retardation.
[2:43:16] you fing idiot. Here's another one.
[2:43:20] gda you to fing hell. And your mother
[2:43:24] is a fing w***e. So,
[2:43:29] uh, if someone, I, I've been in public office
[2:43:33] for 25 years, so I have a pretty thick skin.
[2:43:37] michelle's been here four years and she's a kind, compassionate person.
[2:43:43] and these kind of comments can
[2:43:47] really get to somebody. And this is only a few of them.
[2:43:52] we got lots of comments and emails like this. And I
[2:43:56] am disgusted that as such of an attack on the democratic
[2:44:00] process through, through
[2:44:05] this, these attempts at intimidation and the
[2:44:09] threats that completely against
[2:44:14] american democracy. So, uh,
[2:44:19] if any of you know any of these people, why don't you have a word with them?
[2:44:23] thank you,
[2:44:35] mr. Well, I have the answer to mr. Kendrick's question. Sure. So, sb 54
[2:44:39] does not expressly, um, dd
[2:44:43] certify a police officer. But under the post requirements
[2:44:48] under sb two, there are some provisions that say if you violate
[2:44:52] state law, um, and there's another provision you
[2:44:56] have, you can't, the state can take or demonstrate bias.
[2:45:00] that's another, the state can take away your post certification.
[2:45:05] yeah, I don't wanna put our police officers
[2:45:10] in jeopardy or make it
[2:45:14] difficult for them to do their job. 'cause they really
[2:45:18] need the trust of all the people
[2:45:23] in this community. And we, we've got
[2:45:27] about 30% of our
[2:45:31] population that are hispanic and probably pretty close
[2:45:35] to another 30% that are from the middle east.
[2:45:41] and they, our police officers really need
[2:45:45] their cooperation when it comes to being witnesses, reporting
[2:45:49] crimes. If people
[2:45:54] that are not white have to go to the
[2:45:58] hospital, but they're afraid to go to the hospital and then, and they got, they have kids
[2:46:03] that are afraid to go to school and, uh,
[2:46:08] a child that can't go to the hospital
[2:46:13] or to church or to sunday school
[2:46:17] or ana's, uh, I, I, I think that's
[2:46:21] really bad. And what this is gonna do,
[2:46:25] if they can't go to the clinics
[2:46:30] or hospitals, someone that has, uh, strep throat,
[2:46:34] it, it turns into scarlet fever and they're incredibly
[2:46:39] infectious and they'll be infecting a lot of people.
[2:46:43] and, uh, people won't be getting their vaccinations for measles
[2:46:48] and mumps and chickenpox and, and even worse things
[2:46:52] 'cause they're afraid to go in for a medical help. That's not
[2:46:56] helping our community at all. I represent everybody in this
[2:47:00] city, and I have to, I have to look out for
[2:47:05] everyone. And sb 54
[2:47:09] allows for the police to cooperate
[2:47:14] with ice for violent criminals. And
[2:47:18] I think that's a good thing. 'cause we want to get, all of us, I think wanna
[2:47:22] get the violent criminals outta here.
[2:47:26] but you can see from all the trouble that
[2:47:30] this resolution has caused all the people, it's gotten
[2:47:35] really upset. This is hurting our
[2:47:39] community. This isn't helping our community.
[2:48:08] and this is a true christian. Okay? Please, please be quiet. Okay. So
[2:48:15] when I was, uh, in charge of the play-doh table
[2:48:19] at sunday school when my son was five years old, I was thinking
[2:48:23] about the other day, what would I do
[2:48:27] if el cajon police officers came in there and drug out
[2:48:32] some of those kids? Or if they asked me for a list
[2:48:36] of the names of all the kids. 'cause they're trying to find
[2:48:41] a person that's undocumented or the
[2:48:45] the child of an undocumented person.
[2:48:50] so, uh, I think this is just a, a
[2:48:54] bad, uh, resolution. And why
[2:48:58] is it that el cajon has to be the second city
[2:49:02] out of the 482 cities in california
[2:49:08] that, uh, that
[2:49:12] go along with sb 54? I mean, la
[2:49:16] mesa, santi and all the other cities
[2:49:21] in san diego county aren't addressing
[2:49:25] this. Let's see how this all works out through the courts. And
[2:49:30] I think there's, there've been some comments made about the expense.
[2:49:35] we could end up with lawsuits, you know, going on and on and
[2:49:39] on. We need to have more police officers,
[2:49:44] not fewer, because they're, they're gonna go to another city
[2:49:48] where they're not under the stress of having to figure out, okay,
[2:49:53] what, what law are we gonna comply with? And
[2:49:57] it's, we have a really great police department and we vet
[2:50:01] our police officers probably better than
[2:50:06] most cities in san diego county. 'cause only two outta
[2:50:10] 65 police officers. Uh, only two
[2:50:14] out of 65 police officer applicants
[2:50:18] passed the background check. So the, our police officers
[2:50:23] have been very well vetted, and
[2:50:28] that's what makes a good police department. I wanna keep every police officer
[2:50:32] that we have, and I don't wanna put any more undue stress upon them.
[2:50:38] so thank you.
[2:50:51] well, first of all, um, I'd like to thank, um,
[2:50:55] audra and marcy. She's not here. And
[2:51:00] the young woman in the front row, I, I'm sorry I didn't catch her name.
[2:51:04] I'd like to thank you for bringing up, uh, my bad behavior
[2:51:08] for the last, uh, two weeks ago. It was inexcusable.
[2:51:15] I did try to apologize, but I failed.
[2:51:21] and between marcy and ara, they so
[2:51:25] graciously made sure the email that I had between marcy and
[2:51:30] I I tried to be human
[2:51:34] and vulnerable was spread on the internet. So thank you
[2:51:38] for spreading that email on the internet and making sure that the public knew
[2:51:42] that an elected official was being human and
[2:51:47] not jaded. So you got an elected official being
[2:51:51] human. And I wanna thank you for that. At
[2:52:01] the second thing is that yes, amy, we have the screenshot
[2:52:05] of you on instagram saying that. Can I speak?
[2:52:10] no, I, no, no. Amy, I no,
[2:52:14] amy, I'm sorry. Amy. I'm sorry. I can't. Amy, amy.
[2:52:18] no, we can't. Ladies and gentlemen. Okay, well
[2:52:22] take a break. Come back where, where you can control yourself.
[2:52:33] alright, ladies and gentlemen, I know everybody's upset. I know everybody's heated, but we're
[2:52:37] gonna try to finish this meeting. Okay? So at this point it's still michelle's microphone
[2:52:43] and let her finish. I'm done. I'm done. Alright,
[2:52:55] fan, did you wanna say anything? Yeah, I'll be brief. Uh, this has been two meetings that we've
[2:52:59] discussed this. And, uh, you
[2:53:03] know, my, my I'm clear on this. I want violent criminals removed
[2:53:07] and I have big problems with sb 54. Um, I don't believe
[2:53:12] they make our community safe. And everyone's glossing over all the other crimes that
[2:53:16] sb 54 does not. Um, take into account,
[2:53:20] nonviolent offenses include duis, arson,
[2:53:24] street, uh, robbery, shoplifting, vandalism, theft,
[2:53:29] burglary, battery, uh, disorderly
[2:53:33] conduct, vandalism, shoplifting, forgery,
[2:53:38] receiving stolen property, knowing it, fraud, drug
[2:53:42] offenses. These are all nonviolent crimes
[2:53:46] that sb 54 does not address. And it's
[2:53:51] a gap in the safety and security of our community.
[2:53:55] and I don't understand people leaning on sb 54,
[2:53:59] like it's the know all, be all to make our our community safe.
[2:54:04] and I I I, I'm not gonna be pressured into,
[2:54:09] um, I'm not gonna be pressured or bullied or shouted into
[2:54:14] saying that this resolution is something that it's not. This
[2:54:18] resolution is to get violent criminals off the street and it's nothing else.
[2:54:22] and if people want to project fabricate,
[2:54:26] they, they, they can do that all they want. But that's the intention, that's the
[2:54:30] direction that I want our police officers to, uh,
[2:54:35] to, to move forward with. Um, and the
[2:54:39] generalizations here are, are crazy. Uh, the, the generalizations
[2:54:44] of every immigrant is a criminal. That's not true. That's 100%
[2:54:48] not true. Um, the generalization that I hate mexicans, again,
[2:54:53] not true. And so I'm not convinced of the arguments that I've heard.
[2:54:57] 'cause a lot of them are just conjecture and dis uh, intellectually dishonest.
[2:55:02] um, so, uh, I it's,
[2:55:06] it's, it's saddening that, that and the division that I'm feeling, um,
[2:55:10] is from both sides. And I'm gary, I'm sorry you got those voicemails. You, that's
[2:55:14] unacceptable. I'm sorry you got those. You know, um,
[2:55:19] I I think some of 'em were in the general email box or voicemail box. I'm sorry
[2:55:23] you had to get those. Um, but I'm, I'm, I, and then
[2:55:27] my last comment is I appreciate steve being thoughtful, um,
[2:55:31] and his commitment to, uh, balancing
[2:55:36] both sides of what we've been hearing. Um,
[2:55:40] so those are my comments and that's it. Thank you.
[2:55:51] uh, there was one thing that, uh, I think had a hint of
[2:55:55] our police acting wrong, and I'm gonna clear that up. This is the gustavo
[2:55:59] and hamshaw incident on february 6th, seven 20 in which it was reported there
[2:56:03] was a checkpoint. And that, uh, it inferred that we were asking
[2:56:08] people for their credentials. Uh, I checked with our police department,
[2:56:13] we had no details at that place, at that date and time.
[2:56:17] we issued no citations. We made no stops. Our
[2:56:21] police were not involved in that situation. It could have
[2:56:25] been some other agency, but it was not our police department. So
[2:56:29] let's be truthful about, uh, about our police.
[2:56:35] I, I said what I said about the beginning, my position hasn't changed. It's about public
[2:56:39] safety and, and really what, what
[2:56:43] I want. Sb 54 changed right
[2:56:47] now. If there's any one of these 647,000,
[2:56:52] uh, on the us immigration to
[2:56:56] customer enforcement letter dated september 25th, and it lists
[2:57:00] on here 425,000 convicted criminals not
[2:57:05] detained, 222,000 pending criminal charges for a total of 647,000.
[2:57:10] if they are living liz gemma, please, if they are living
[2:57:14] in our community, we need them out. And we
[2:57:18] need sb 54 changed so that we can get them out. We
[2:57:22] can't just wait for them to run a red light or do something
[2:57:27] if you are a known convicted criminal. Ladies and gentlemen, I can stop the meeting again.
[2:57:31] do we need to stop the meeting again? This is about, I'm letting you decide
[2:57:35] this is about public safety for me. It always has been. So you've heard
[2:57:39] my thoughts in the beginning. Uh, I will support the resolution because I,
[2:57:44] uh, found an amendment to make sure that we cover the backs of our police officers who
[2:57:48] have our backs.
[2:58:03] I was really surprised that this resolution was even, uh, controversial.
[2:58:08] this should have been a, a no brainer. We arrest somebody
[2:58:13] for doing something bad that does not belong into this country. We
[2:58:17] should be able to do everything we can to get them outta this country. Because you know what?
[2:58:21] if we book them downtown, even if they commit a pretty serious crime, they're
[2:58:26] probably back on the street in two hours. It is my job to do everything
[2:58:30] I can to protect the people of el cajon. It's also my job to represent the people
[2:58:34] of el cajon, 57% of which said that they want to change.
[2:58:39] america is in the process of change. America is in, in the process of
[2:58:43] putting america first again. Some people are not gonna like that. Some people
[2:58:47] are gonna lose money. Some people are gonna lose status. Some people who, whose
[2:58:51] etiology is going to be challenged by it. But lemme tell you something. Those of
[2:58:55] you who came and were completely intellectually dishonest, completely
[2:58:59] disingenuous, made things up at a whole cloth, you are not
[2:59:03] doing your cause. Any good people just tune you out because they know you're
[2:59:07] liars. At this point, I'd
[2:59:12] like to make a motion. I'd like to
[2:59:16] make a motion to approve.
[2:59:20] I'd like to make the motion to prove the resolution. You're not second,
[2:59:26] move the second please vote.
[2:59:31] motion passes. Motion passes
[2:59:36] by a three to vote with council member kendrick and mitchell
[2:59:40] voting no. Okay. Yes.
[2:59:56] you
[3:00:01] okay. We're gonna continue. Tell your wife not
[3:00:05] to take pictures of us
[3:00:12] wife taking. Okay.
[3:00:19] I want people who this brings us to
[3:00:27] your ladies. Gentlemen, we're almost done.
[3:00:31] give me two seconds. There are no general information items of today's agenda.
[3:00:35] no first or second meeting ordinances and no closed session. This brings us to the adjournment
[3:00:39] of the regular joint meeting of the oklahoma city council. Oklahoma housing authority successor
[3:00:43] agency to the oklahoma redevelopment agency. Agency held this 11th, february, 2025
[3:00:48] is ajour until tuesday, february 25th, 2025 at 3:00 pm.