San Diego, CA
San Diego County Board, sheriff battle over new policy ending ICE transfers
A battle is brewing over San Diego County’s new policy aimed at limiting the sheriff’s transfers of undocumented individuals into the custody of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE.
The San Diego County Board of Supervisors on Tuesday passed the measure to end the use of any county resources for immigration enforcement by a vote of 3-1.
The policy builds on Senate Bill 54, a state law known as the California Values Act that was passed in 2017 to limit state and local participation in deportations, with some exceptions for people convicted of crimes like assault and battery.
The Board’s new measure closes those exceptions, which Board Chair Nora Vargas called “loophole[s]” in introducing the policy. The measure ends voluntary transfers from the county into ICE custody, or notifications of anyone’s release from detention, requiring the federal agency to get a judicial warrant. Approximately 200 people were transferred from San Diego County into ICE custody last year.
Hours after the policy’s passage on Tuesday, Sheriff Kelly Martinez said in a statement she would not enforce it, noting she “will continue to follow state law and there is no loophole in state statute.”
“The Sheriff’s Office will not change its practices based on the Board resolution and policy that was passed at today’s meeting,” the statement from Martinez’s office reads in part. “The Board of Supervisors does not set policy for the Sheriff’s Office. The Sheriff, as an independently elected official, sets the policy for the Sheriff’s Office.”
“California law prohibits the Board of Supervisors from interfering with the independent, constitutionally and statutorily designated investigative functions of the Sheriff, and is clear that the Sheriff has the sole and exclusive authority to operate the county jails,” the statement concludes.
Advocates have long pushed for the new Board policy.
“We believe this is very important when it comes to ensuring public safety,” said Ian Seruelo, the chair of the San Diego Immigrant Rights Consortium, a coalition of advocacy groups.
“The only way for our communities to trust the local government and the local police is to show that our local police is separate and not part of ICE, is not part of immigration enforcement,” he said. “You may not want to report to the police if you think the police is part of ICE, right?”
On Thursday, Seruelo and the SDIRC sent a letter to Martinez, copying the County Board and California Attorney General Rob Bonta, urging her to comply with the new policy.
At issue is the clause within SB 54 that states, “A law enforcement official shall have discretion to cooperate with immigration authorities only if doing so would not violate any federal, state, or local law, or local policy.”
The SDIRC’s letter said “any transfer of notification that is made without a judicial warrant is a direct violation of state law,” because it would violate the new local policy.
“We hope that your statement was a mere misunderstanding on your part of the full scope of the California Values Act, and not a flagrant disregard for state law, our democratic processes and our constitutional rights,” the letter reads.
In response, Martinez again reiterated in a statement Friday, “The Sheriff’s Office will not be expanding nor changing anything we have been doing,” adding that the office “will continue to follow state law and maintain the way we have been operating for several years.”
“The sheriff’s department is saying, ‘Stop. That’s not the state law,’” said immigration attorney Esther Valdes Clayton. “We follow the state constitution and the government code. And the what the government code says is that we can cooperate when it comes to these particularly egregious crimes.”
Valdes Clayton said she believed the Board policy was a “largely symbolic resolution” to score political points before President-elect Donald Trump takes office in January.
“Why was this important to San Diegans?” she asked. “I think it was more important to the three Board of Supervisors and their political careers to have this go on paper and try to attempt to Trump-proof our community.”
Valdes Clayton noted she thought there would be several lawsuits over the policy, adding, “This is something that I believe the Department of Justice is going to have to clarify, all the way to the Supreme Court.”
Seruelo said he too believed lawsuits were a distinct possibility.
“We are ready to continue to be vigilant and to monitor the implementation of the resolution,” he said. “If the sheriff, you know, indeed refuses to follow the resolution and transfers any of our community members without any judicial warrant, then, you know, we may – if we will have to go file a lawsuit in this regard, we would. That would be one of our options, definitely.”
When asked about the conflict, Bonta’s office said in a statement in part, “it is our expectation is that all local law enforcement agencies comply with SB 54 and all applicable local policies enacted in accordance with SB 54.”
“In light of the President-elect’s threats of mass detention, arrests, and deportation, we are monitoring compliance closely; we will take a look at the facts of each scenario as it arises; and we will respond appropriately if we believe an agency is violating the law,” Bonta’s statement continued, pointing back to the county for issues of compliance with local policy.
San Diego, CA
San Diego Unified School Board member’s dog poisoned in Sorrento Valley backyard
A member of the San Diego Unified School Board says someone poisoned her dog in her Sorrento Valley backyard last week.
Sabrina Bazzo says she found her golden retriever Bruno chewing on meat laced with poison and metal hooks on Dec. 12. Two handfuls of it were thrown into her backyard.
There are plenty of playthings in Bruno’s backyard, but nothing as dangerous as what the 2-and-a-half-year-old dog found that afternoon.
“When I first saw it, I was just so shocked, I couldn’t believe it,” Bazzo said.
She keeps what is left of two fistfuls of shredded meat tied up with string in her refrigerator.
“It had these blue-like crystals in there and these metal pieces, like metal hooks. That’s when I like freaked out,” Bazzo said.
Within 20 minutes of swallowing that poisonous bait, she brought Bruno to the animal hospital, where they induced vomiting. No further medical treatment was necessary, but timing was everything. Bazzo says had it taken longer, the outcome could have been much worse.
“The vet said if animals take in enough, a decent amount, there is nothing they can do,” Bazzo said.
Like all pets, Bruno is special, but for more reasons than the obvious. Bruno was just a puppy when he became part of the Bazzo family. It happened when her husband David was diagnosed with stage 4 brain cancer. Her husband died last June.
“Now that he’s actually gone, I have Bruno here with me. He has been very comforting for the family,” Bazzo said.
Three months after her husband’s death, Bazzo received a letter in the mail. It was typed in bold red letters. It read, “Please shut your (expletive) dog up with all the barking day and night.”
“It was during a difficult time for us that makes this that much more sad. We never leave him unsupervised, just being outside on his own,“ Bazzo said.
She suspects the author of the letter is also behind the poison food thrown in her backyard.
In part of an email, San Diego Humane Society spokesperson Nina Thompson wrote: “San Diego Humane Society’s Humane Law Enforcement is currently investigating a recent incident of suspected animal cruelty. We are working diligently to investigate all leads.”
What was once a safe retreat designed and maintained by her late husband while still alive, now, seems more like a trap.
“To now feel like someone is watching me or knows my dog is in the backyard and wants to do him harm, it’s scary,” Bazzo said.
Bazzo says until she finds out who did this, she can’t be sure whether this has anything to do with her position on the school board or her dog.
San Diego, CA
Guest Column: The black hole in the center of Poway
Those of us who live near the City of Poway Town Center have experienced and continue to see a development project that has languished for over five years and now clearly can be defined as blight.
It is a “black hole” that is anchored in the center of the city near the intersection of Poway and Community roads, one block from City Hall. The project is adjacent to the Poway shopping center plaza, a Section 8 apartment complex and the Poway Bernardo Mortuary.
Those of us who live in central Poway have this visual blight, which consists of a partially constructed vacant multistory building and an unfinished tiered underground parking structure. This incomplete project was approved by the City Council in 2018 as a mixed-use development project.
It sits on a one-and-a-half-acre infill site and was originally permitted for 53 residential units, a 40,000-square-foot commercial space, a 20,025-square-foot fitness center and a two-tiered underground parking structure.
Over the last five years it has transitioned through three different developers and multiple permit amendments. The current and final amended project is a significantly scaled-down project. It would take someone with a bachelor’s degree in city and urban planning to read the permit amendments and comprehend what the final project will consist of if and when it is completed.
Those of us who live in or near the Town Center district are aware the Poway Road Specific Plan was approved with City Council commitment that high-density development would be well planned and would consist of “efficient high-density development.”
A blighted development project that has not been completed and has remained vacant and unfinished for five years is not keeping with the Specific Plan. This project is a blemish on central Poway. The City Council has not implemented solutions to complete this unfinished project.
Further, other development projects in the same corridor have as a matter of practice during their construction phases posted signage on their respective construction fencing, advertising what the project consists of and when it is estimated to be completed. The “black hole” has no such signage on its construction fencing and the general public has no idea what this project consists of or when it will be completed.
Direct attempts and meetings to obtain information from previous and current city representatives have resulted in finger-pointing at the developer. Two developers have already walked away from this project and the third and current developer is under contract with a local general contractor.
The City Council approved, conditioned and permitted this project. I have to think that if this project was located in the “Farm” development area and stood half developed and vacant for over five years there would be a different level of urgency by the council to finding a solution to correct this unsightly development project.
The council has failed those of us who live in and near the Poway Town Center corridor. Stop blaming the developer and get this failed project completed.
Locke is a 22-year U.S. Marine Corp veteran and a longtime Poway resident.
San Diego, CA
Frustrated teachers walk out of SBUSD meeting that decided to close Central Elementary
Frustrations boiled over at Wednesday night’s South Bay Union School District meeting. Parents and teachers are upset that the district is going to shut down Central Elementary and possibly two others at a later time.
At one point in the meeting, teachers got so upset that they walked out. It came after the school board voted unanimously to approve an interim superintendent’s pay package for nearly $18,500 a month.
That payday comes at time when teachers rallied outside the meeting because they might strike since they’ve been in contract negotiations for more than a year.
The board also voted unanimously to close Central Elementary at the end of this school year. Berry and Sunnyslope Elementary schools could close as well, at a later time. But that’ll be based on a review of enrollment and financial data going forward.
The district says declining enrollment and declining revenues are major problems and factors in its decision. It says keeping under enrolled schools open would increase maintenance costs, stretch limited resources and hamper the ability to deliver equitable services across all schools.
But teachers and parents say paying the interim superintendent that amount of money shows it’s a matter of allocation and priorities.
Hinting that district leaders are being scrooges, a group of teachers took a page out of “A Christmas Carol” and dressed as ghosts.
“By closing these doors, you destroyed the heart of community. Families see no future, pack their cars and leave behind empty houses and desolate streets,” one teacher said.
While only Central is closing this year, Sunnyslope could close at the end of the 2028-2029 school year. Berry could close at the end of the 2031-2032 school year.
-
Iowa4 days agoAddy Brown motivated to step up in Audi Crooks’ absence vs. UNI
-
Washington1 week agoLIVE UPDATES: Mudslide, road closures across Western Washington
-
Iowa6 days agoHow much snow did Iowa get? See Iowa’s latest snowfall totals
-
Maine3 days agoElementary-aged student killed in school bus crash in southern Maine
-
Maryland4 days agoFrigid temperatures to start the week in Maryland
-
Technology1 week agoThe Game Awards are losing their luster
-
South Dakota5 days agoNature: Snow in South Dakota
-
Nebraska1 week agoNebraska lands commitment from DL Jayden Travers adding to early Top 5 recruiting class