Dozens of residents rallied outside Morgan Hill City Hall and packed the council chambers Aug. 19, using an organized public comment campaign to renew pressure on the City Council to formally oppose the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement detention facility proposed near Gilroy—and to restrict ICE’s ability to operate within city limits.
The push follows a June 24 special closed session in which the council considered joining the brief supporting a lawsuit filed by California Attorney General Rob Bonta and Santa Clara County Counsel Tony LoPresti. The council opted not to report out the result of the closed session, indicating that no action was taken to join the brief.
Bonta’s lawsuit seeks to block construction of the ICE facility at 7240 Holsclaw Road, alleging the project violates state and federal law.
The rally, held ahead of the council’s 6pm meeting, was organized by a coalition of advocacy groups including the Silicon Valley Democratic Socialists of America (SVDSA), ICE Out of Gilroy and the Community Agency for Resources, Advocacy and Services. The group said in a media advisory that more than 192 residents had signed an online letter campaign demanding “ICE out of Morgan Hill.”
Sixteen speakers addressed the council during the general public comment period that followed, urging the city to sign onto the multiagency amicus brief opposing the ICE facility.
Commenters at the Aug. 19 meeting organized to express their dissatisfaction with the council’s choice not to act.
Bruce Cooley, a Morgan Hill resident, chastised the council for its decision not to report the vote.
“I find that lack of transparency disappointing, particularly on an issue of such significant public interest,” Cooley said. “I ask the Council to reconsider that decision and disclose why Morgan Hill did not join the amicus brief, and how each councilmember and the mayor voted on this issue.”
Speakers also demanded the council adopt a “no staging” policy similar to that adopted by the county, barring ICE from using city assets to coordinate their operations, such as parks, parking lots and municipal buildings.
No speaker addressed the council in opposition to the brief or the proposed restrictions during the session.
“I hope that when the public is exclaiming to you in such a unanimous way what they want, why they want it, and how it’s hurting them, that you will listen appropriately,” said Phil Orcelli, representing the Silicon Valley Democratic Socialists of America. “Otherwise, I don’t see how we can trust you in your current position, or why we should afford you that trust.”
