Correspondence - Item 32 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

July 1, 2025 Santa Ana City Council 20 Civic Center Plaza Santa Ana, CA 92701 Re: Agenda Item#27, #28, and #32 Dear Mayor Valerie Amezcua and Santa Ana City Council Members, We write in support of Agenda Items #27 and #32. As always, we support efforts to advocate for community safety and to make transparent immigration enforcement presence in our neighborhoods. We also write to encourage the City Council to carefully consider its approach to direct aid for residents during this time, as to be discussed under Agenda Item #28: 1. Existing programming. The City of Santa Ana already has an existing program to support residents impacted by immigration enforcement-the immigration legal defense fund. Legal support is often a heavy financial strain on impacted families, so allocating additional funds to increase legal support capacity is one avenue through which to offer financial relief to residents. Agenda Item #28 includes expansion of funding for the immigration legal defense fund. Such an expansion does not need to be routed through or otherwise made more complicated by the creation of an additional program. Moreover, we continue to emphasize the importance of ensuring that City-funded legal services are accessible to and reach impacted community members, including Southeast Asian refugees who are disproportionately targeted for deportation and face unique challenges to securing adequate legal representation. 2. Funding sources for emergency cash assistance. While some other cities in the region are utilizing cancelled event funds to support immigrant and refugee residents, their programs involve significantly smaller allocations.' We strongly encourage the Council to consider intergovernmental partnerships, public-private partnerships with philanthropic funders, and amendments to the municipal budget as primary options for funding the emergency assistance program instead of reallocating community event funds for reasons described below. All three options are also funding avenues pursued by other Southern California municipalities seeking to create aid programs for families impacted by immigration enforcement. 3. Honoring the agency of impacted residents and upholding community pride. There are legitimate safety concerns that many families are grappling with when deciding whether to step outside their homes, and direct cash assistance is one important way to support families negatively impacted by immigration enforcement. However, should the City Council pursue the creation of this emergency cash assistance fund, we encourage the Council to consider additional or alternative funding sources and allow families the choice of whether to participate in community events. Families deserve the opportunity to make informed decisions for themselves rather than having the Council make that decision for them wholesale through mass cancellation of events-important events that celebrate the rich heritage of local immigrant and refugee communities. Similar programs in the cities of El Monte and Montebello have involved municipal fund allocations of approximately$100,000. Even considering the larger population size and demographics of the City of Santa Ana,a proportionate program would likely be about$300,000-400,000.The City of Anaheim's program is a partnership and is only partially funded by the municipal government.