Special Notice / Hearing: None__
Vote Required: Majority
To: Honorable Board of Supervisors
From: Supervisor Noelia Corzo, District 2
Supervisor Ray Mueller, District 3
Subject: Introduction of an ordinance amending Chapter 2.48 of Title 2 of the San Mateo County Ordinance Code to amend Section 2.48.010 to restrict access to County owned or controlled property and add Sections 2.48.020, 2.48.030 and 2.48.040 to Chapter 2.48 to require reporting on immigration enforcement activities and regulate law enforcement identification and use of face masks
RECOMMENDATION:
title
Introduction of an ordinance amending Chapter 2.48 of Title 2 of the San Mateo County Ordinance Code to amend Section 2.48.010 to restrict access to County owned or controlled property and add Sections 2.48.020, 2.48.030 and 2.48.040 to Chapter 2.48 to require reporting on immigration enforcement activities and regulate law enforcement identification and use of face masks, and waive the reading of the ordinance in its entirety.
body
BACKGROUND:
San Mateo County has long upheld policies that protect all residents regardless of immigration status and prohibit the use of County resources for federal immigration enforcement purposes. Chapter 2.48 of Title 2 of the San Mateo County Ordinance Code currently prohibits the use of County resources to assist or cooperate with federal immigration enforcement authorities, except as required by law.
However, recent developments have demonstrated the need to strengthen and clarify these protections to ensure that County operations, facilities, and personnel do not support immigration enforcement activity.
The ordinance responds to several community and operational concerns:
• Lack of transparency, accountability, and public policy data: There is currently no formal mechanism for County departments to report immigration enforcement communications or activities. This ordinance establishes a consistent reporting structure to the Board of Supervisors, increasing transparency and public accountability.
• Public fear and disruption: Increased immigration enforcement in San Mateo County and throughout California has caused fear, displacement, and loss of work and class time among immigrant families. The Board recognizes that uncertainty about enforcement activities harms community trust and engagement, particularly among residents who rely on County services.
• Public safety and identification concerns: The federal government’s use of personnel who lack visible identification has led to confusion and fear among community members. Ensuring that law enforcement officers are visibly identifiable promotes public safety, accountability, and trust.
Together, these concerns highlight the need to clarify prohibitions on use of County resources to assist immigration enforcement, add clear reporting requirements to increase transparency and public trust, and reiterate state law requiring the use of visible identification during law enforcement operations.
DISCUSSION:
The ordinance makes updates to Chapter 2.48 of the San Mateo County Ordinance Code:
First, Section 2.48.010 is amended to explicitly prohibit County departments, agencies, and employees from allowing immigration authorities access to the County-owned firearms range at Coyote Point Park without a judicial warrant. This clarification ensures that County facilities and resources are not used to support training of federal immigration authorities.
Second, Section 2.48.010 is amended to make clear that County departments, agencies, and employees are prohibited from using County funds, staff time, or resources to assist in traffic enforcement conducted for the purpose of aiding immigration enforcement. This amendment also clarifies that immigration authorities are prohibited from using County property as a staging area or operational base for federal enforcement actions.
Third, a new Section 2.48.020 establishes a reporting framework for County departments to ensure that any communications with or requests from federal immigration authorities are reported to the public and the Board of Supervisors for its consideration in its public policy work. The Sheriff and Chief Probation Officer will submit quarterly reports to the Board of Supervisors detailing the number of detainer requests received from immigration authorities, any communications made by the department to immigration authorities, and any enforcement actions observed within San Mateo County. These reports will also be posted on the Sheriff’s Office website.
In addition, all County departments must report any direct interactions with immigration authorities, such as subpoenas, warrants, or surveillance of County facilities, to the County Executive within 24 hours of their occurrence. The County Executive will maintain a log of these reports and provide a summary to the Board on the same quarterly schedule. This process enhances transparency and ensures that the Board and the public receive clear, consistent, and timely communication about immigration enforcement activity.
Fourth, a new Section 2.48.030 directs the Sheriff to maintain and publicly post policies governing both visible identification and the use of facial coverings by sworn personnel. The ordinance requires that officers display their name or badge number and agency affiliation while performing enforcement duties, with narrow exemptions for undercover operations, protective equipment, or exigent circumstances. SB 627 (Wiener), the No Secret Police Act, prohibits law enforcement officers from wearing a facial covering in the performance of their duties, except as specified. This ordinance supports the implementation of this prohibition in San Mateo County to reassure community members of alignment with the law.
COMMUNITY IMPACT:
Increased federal immigration enforcement activity in California has created fear and uncertainty, leading to disruptions in schools, workplaces, and neighborhoods that have deep impacts on immigrant communities and local economies. The proposed ordinance refines and reinforces San Mateo County’s commitment to protecting our immigrant community, ensuring public safety and building trust between local government and residents.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Adopting this ordinance may result in minor administrative costs related to preparing and submitting quarterly reports to the Board of Supervisors and maintaining and posting policies on facial coverings. These costs are anticipated to be absorbed within existing departmental budgets and staff workloads.