Tiny Los Alamitos rarely stirs big news, but in the months since its city council passed an ordinance to defy California’s sanctuary law, the town residents just call “Los Al” has found itself on a very big political stage.
National media has told stories about the community and its ordinance. Some city leaders have become semi-regular visitors to the White House, where they’ve shared like-minded ideas about immigration. And dozens of other cities in California have issued statements that echo the spirit, although not the legal weight, of the idea expressed by Los Alamitos’ ordinance.
But there’s been a cost.
While other cities passed mostly symbolic resolutions critical of California’s sanctuary law, known as SB-54 – which prevents local law enforcement from cooperating routinely with federal immigration agents – Los Alamitos went further. The ordinance exempts the town from SB-54, in essence giving its police authority to ignore the state law.
Two days after taking that step, the city was sued.
To date, the suit has led Los Alamitos to spend $105,000 on its legal defense. That’s chump change for a bigger city, but not trivial in an 11,600-resident town with an annual budget of approximately $17 million. And it’s a talking point for residents who are frustrated that a law that some stridently oppose is generating any legal bills at all.
While those bills still could mount, later, the meter currently isn’t running.
Late last month, the lawsuit against the city by the American Civil Liberties Union and local residents, was formally put on hold as parties wait to see how courts rule in a separate case that pits the city of Huntington Beach against the state of California.
Meanwhile, with the midterm election at hand and immigration playing out as a national argument, Los Alamitos’ law continues to stir strong emotion.
“(Some people say) we’re crazy; we’re on the crazy train. How can we do this to our city?’ But I ask you to walk that one back a little,” Los Alamitos Mayor Troy Edgar told the audience at a recent council meeting.
He noted that Los Alamitos has balanced its budget for years, and built up a reserve, adding: “We’ve got judgment. We’re not on the crazy train.”
Still, support might be fading. Councilman Mark Chirco was the lone dissenting vote when Los Alamitos passed its anti-sanctuary law, and he remains opposed. Recently, Councilman Richard Murphy changed his mind and came out against the local law, saying the suit could eat up millions in tax dollars if it winds up in the state Supreme Court and if the city winds up losing.
To date, a third nay vote – which on a five-person council could overturn the ordinance – hasn’t emerged. Edgar and council members Shelley Hasselbrink and Warren Kusumoto, who introduced the measure, say they’ll keep watching the legal bill but remain behind the lawsuit.
If there’s a “this is where we stop” point, they haven’t said what it is.
The ordinance
The ordinance originated with Kusumoto, an electrical engineer first elected to the city council in 2010.
The sanctuary law the ordinance opposes – SB-54, known as the California Values Act – was introduced by State Sen. Kevin de León, D-Los Angeles, in late 2016. It was written in response to President Trump’s plans to step up immigration enforcement, and it became law at the beginning of this year, when federal agents were well into a campaign to step up enforcement of immigration laws.
The Values Act is one of several state laws aimed at protecting people in the country illegally from federal immigration agents. It prohibits local and state law enforcement from using any resources, including officers or deputies, to investigate or arrest people for federal immigration enforcement purposes. It also bans holding unauthorized immigrants for immigration agents.
But the law carves out exceptions, too, as it allows for the transfer of inmates to federal authorities if those people have been convicted of any serious offenses, including assault, battery and rape.
Kusumoto said it wasn’t right that California was refusing to fully cooperate with immigration authorities. He also argued that it put local officials like him in a bind, presenting a conflict between SB-54, the state constitution, immigration law.
In April, without consulting the city attorney or city manager, Kusumoto and Edgar brought the idea for an opposing measure before their colleagues. The council introduced and first voted on it in a public meeting on March 19, and passed the ordinance, 4-1, in a second public meeting, on April 16.
Both council meetings drew overflow crowds and, with them, rising anger. Insults were hurled and attendees – many from outside Los Alamitos – pulled out cell phones to capture the scene on video, sometimes pushing the devices into each other’s faces.
“This ordinance has brought such hate to our city,” said Cathery Yeh, a Seal Beach resident whose 10-year-old daughter was heckled as she addressed the council. “It doesn’t represent our community.”
In addition to producing an anti-sanctuary ordinance, those two spring meetings also led to the creation of an opposition group, Los Alamitos Community United.
That group, along with local resident attorney Henry Josefsberg, joined with the American Civil Liberties Union of Southern California to file suit against the city of Los Alamitos.
Fighting the law
As the ordinance became a symbol for those who oppose California’s policies regarding immigration, it also boosted the profile of some of the city’s elected leaders.
Edgar, the mayor of Orange County’s second smallest city, became a repeat guest on numerous national shows, especially on Fox News. He’s been interviewed by media in Spain, Canada and Japan. And he has been invited to the White House three times. Councilman Kusumoto has gone with him twice to the Oval Office and, during the most recent visit, the pair was joined by Huntington Beach Mayor Mike Posey.
After the Los Alamitos’ ordinance and mostly symbolic actions from other communities, Shawn Steel, Republican National Committeeman of California, began working with a national anti-illegal immigration group to see if other cities would pass similar ordinances. To date, according to Steel, some 60 California cities and counties have adopted resolutions or otherwise moved to support the anti-sanctuary debate.
Still, Los Al and Huntington Beach stand out, even if their tactics differ.
Los Alamitos created what is so far the only ordinance against the state law, which led to a lawsuit against the city. Huntington Beach took the offensive, filing a lawsuit against the state.
That difference is key. By being the legal aggressor, Huntington Beach, a much larger city – with an annual budget north of $370 million – can more easily control how much it spends to make its point. Huntington Beach City Attorney Michael Gates said the bill is small, so far, because the city is using its in-house attorney and has devoted only 30 hours of prep-time to the lawsuit. If the bill gets too high, the city can simply drop its suit.
So far, Huntington Beach is winning.
In September, Orange County Superior Court Judge James Crandall ruled in favor of the beach town, saying as a charter city Huntington Beach can restrict “the ever-extending tentacles of state government.” The state is expected to appeal that ruling.
But Los Alamitos is in a different spot.
Though the case against the city is in limbo, pending the outcome of Huntington Beach’s suit, the legal bills could kick back in as long as its ordinance remains on the books. The primary control Los Alamitos has over its legal bill is keeping – or dropping – its law.
The city is hoping for a win by Huntington Beach. If the California Values Act is struck down as unconstitutional, Los Alamitos’ Edgar said “We could rescind our ordinance because we won’t need it anymore.”
Most Los Alamitos council members said this week they are pleased with the latest legal development because it halts costs.
“We realize the Huntington Beach case is very strong,” Edgar said. “And they will have the resources to pursue the case all the way to the California Supreme Court.”
Los Alamitos legal fight is financed in part by a GoFund me account. To date, that account has raised about $30,000.
Other costs
Some residents are restless, pointing out that the city has non-immigration business to handle.
“Our trees haven’t been cut in five years. Our streets are absolutely awful,” long-time resident Rob Feldman said at a recent council meeting. He questioned why Los Alamitos is spending anything on the legal fight to protect its ordinance.
“It’s a lot of money for a small city like us.”
But other residents want city officials to stand their ground.
“You made the right decision. You made a principled decision. You chose to take a stand on an issue that is greater than yourselves, greater than Los Alamitos,” former Councilman Art DeBolt recently told city officials.
Councilman Chirco, an attorney and the only one to vote against the ordinance, argued from the beginning that it was a poor fiscal choice. The issue, he said, is already being litigated in federal court, where the Trump administration is suing California over SB-54 and other sanctuary laws.
“It’s a really divisive issue and a very emotional issue. From my perspective, the ordinance has hurt Los Alamitos in multiple ways.”
Los Alamitos soon will switch to district-style elections, picking council candidates who represent small parts of the community – a move Chirco said wouldn’t have happened if the city didn’t push the ordinance.
“We have lost some of the local control we on the city council so desperately want to preserve,” Chirco said.
Josefsberg, the Los Alamitos resident and attorney who is one of the plaintiffs against his city, has urged the council to drop its fight. He questioned the city’s method of protest, noting their route – passing a law against SB-54 – was by far the most expensive.
Kusumoto countered that if anyone is to blame for the city spending money on the lawsuit it’s Josefsberg.
“He’s complaining we’re spending money,” the councilman said. “But he’s the guy who is causing us to spend money.”
The schools
Some residents believe Los Alamitos’ ordinance is a show of intolerance toward the Latino community. And they point to other local incidents that target various minority communities.
In September, Roni Burns-Ellis, the principal of McGaugh Elementary School in nearby Seal Beach, turned to Facebook to say football player Colin Kaepernick is “an anti-American thug” for kneeling during the national anthem as a way to protest police brutality. Her comments drew both support and criticism, including from some who argued they were racially motivated.
At a Sept. 25 school board meeting in Los Alamitos Unified, students and parents brought up other incidents that they viewed as racist and intolerant. At the meeting, one African American girl said she was asked why her legs were “dirty.” Another was told she’s “pretty for a black girl.” Several were called by a derogatory word.
“As a district, we have a pervasive undercurrent of exclusion,” one Los Alamitos High School teacher told the board.
Latinos make up about 24 percent of Los Alamitos and a little more than half of the population is non-Hispanic white, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. The Los Alamitos Unified School District — which serves Los Alamitos, Seal Beach, Rossmoor and adjacent communities – has more than 9,800 students, and the demographics are similar.
Superintendent Sherry Kropp said in a brief phone interview that the Los Alamitos anti-sanctuary ordinance “has nothing to do with the rules, regulations, practices and education in our school district.”
At the September board meeting, Kropp acknowledged that not all students and families are “feeling valued, safe, welcome, included and supported in our schools, and throughout our community.”
The district, Kropp said, plans to address concerns of racism and intolerance by creating a human relations task force. The district also might offer education to those involved in incidents of bigotry instead of only punishing the offender.
“It’s crystal clear that we still have work to do,” Kropp told the audience.
While the school district grapples with complaints of racism, city officials Edgar and Kusumoto say their ordinance has little to do with Latinos or immigrants. Instead, they argue, it’s about the state telling local officials how to run their towns or manage their finances.
And, in the end, finances might get the final word.
When asked how much his city will spend to defend the ordinance, Kusumoto said every council member will have a personal threshold.
“At what point do you say, ‘I know I’m right but I have to give up?’,” he asked. “I don’t know.”
RELATED STORIES
Los Alamitos approves its precedent-setting anti-sanctuary ordinance
Sanctuary opponents travel from town to town, screaming an agenda
Orange, Newport Beach join other Orange County cities opposing California sanctuary law
Long Beach council approves Values Act, creating a strengthened sanctuary city policy
Trump tweets support for O.C. anti-sanctuary push; responses mixed
San Gabriel approves ‘safe city’ sanctuary resolution
Pandemonium in West Covina over challenging sanctuary state law
Corona opposes California sanctuary law, cites public safety concerns
Protesters call on Riverside leaders to support ‘sanctuary state’ law
Santa Ana sides with state in sanctuary city legal fight
Yucaipa opposes California’s sanctuary state law, approves letter of opposition