SACRAMENTO, Calif. — Sacramento’s city manager has issued a directive prohibiting police officers from serving as security for federal immigration agents, establishing new dispatch requirements and warning that providing operational assistance to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement could violate California law.
The directive followed allegations that Sacramento police detained three people observing federal immigration enforcement operations in south Sacramento. The incident has also drawn attention to a separate dispute over the city’s decision to involve immigrant rights organization NorCal Resist in training municipal employees.
In a three-page letter to Interim Police Chief Zachary Bales, City Manager Maraskeshia Smith instructed officers not to respond to ICE requests merely because federal agents report being followed, photographed or recorded by members of the public.
“Sacramento Police officers are not, and shall not act as, a security detail for ICE or its immigration enforcement operations,” Smith wrote.
“Effective immediately, officers shall not be dispatched to assist ICE agents solely because individuals are following their vehicles, observing their activities, recording their operations, or otherwise engaging in lawful conduct.”
Smith emphasized that observing federal law enforcement activity does not constitute a public safety emergency, even when agents object to being watched.
“The mere presence of individuals observing federal agents, even when those agents find the attention unwelcome or uncomfortable, does not establish a public safety emergency or justify a police response,” she wrote.
The directive establishes specific requirements for police dispatchers and supervisors before officers may respond to requests involving federal immigration agents.
Dispatch personnel must obtain and document facts establishing a credible threat to federal agents, members of the public or another legitimate public safety concern. When the circumstances are unclear, a field supervisor must review the request and determine whether police intervention is appropriate.
Smith identified threats of violence, assaults, attempted assaults, independently identifiable criminal activity and other genuine emergencies as circumstances that may justify a response.
However, the directive makes clear that even when officers respond to a legitimate emergency involving ICE, their involvement must remain limited to addressing the specific threat or criminal conduct.
“Officers shall not provide escorts, protective surveillance, traffic control, crowd control, perimeter security, or other operational support for the purpose of facilitating federal immigration enforcement,” Smith wrote.
Once the independent public safety concern has been resolved, officers must disengage.
The letter also grounds the restrictions in California’s Values Act, commonly known as Senate Bill 54, which limits the use of state and local law enforcement resources for federal immigration enforcement.
Smith cited Government Code sections 7284.2, 7284.4(f) and 7284.6(a), emphasizing that assistance with immigration enforcement is not limited to making arrests or physically detaining individuals.
“Providing security or other operational assistance that facilitates immigration enforcement may fall within this definition,” she wrote.
The city manager also cited California Attorney General Opinion No. 25-602, issued Aug. 11, 2026, addressing circumstances in which local law enforcement may provide public safety services near federal immigration facilities.
According to Smith’s letter, the opinion emphasizes that compliance with the California Values Act depends on the specific facts and circumstances of an officer’s actions, including their purpose.
“Simply characterizing an assignment as a public safety response does not automatically establish that it complies with California law,” Smith wrote.
She warned that dispatching officers because ICE agents are being followed or observed, without an independently identifiable public safety concern, could amount to providing security for federal immigration operations.
“That creates a serious concern that our personnel and resources are being used to facilitate immigration enforcement in violation of the California Values Act,” the letter states.
The directive followed an Oct. 27 incident near 16th Avenue and 47th Street in south Sacramento involving three individuals associated with NorCal Resist who were monitoring federal immigration enforcement activity.
According to KCRA, Sacramento police said officers responded to a report of a vehicle being driven recklessly and detained its occupants while investigating.
NorCal Resist disputed the circumstances surrounding the stop, alleging that the individuals were lawfully observing ICE operations and were detained for approximately 20 minutes.
The organization subsequently circulated video footage and photographs that it said showed Sacramento police officers interacting with federal immigration agents after the encounter.
“We’ll be seeking accountability and transparency on exactly what happened. But we have no doubt that ICE called this in, and Sac PD responded in the way they did,” Giselle Garcia, programs director for NorCal Resist, told KCRA.
Neither Sacramento police nor the Department of Homeland Security publicly identified the person who reported the alleged reckless driving.
The circumstances of the encounter remain disputed, including whether federal immigration agents requested the police response and what information was exchanged between local officers and federal personnel.
Alyssa Gatti, one of the people detained, subsequently addressed the Sacramento City Council and questioned whether officers had assisted federal immigration enforcement.
According to The Sacramento Bee, Gatti told council members that officers had not identified a specific penal code violation during the encounter.
The incident prompted questions about whether Sacramento’s sanctuary policies were being consistently implemented.
Smith’s letter explicitly distinguishes between protecting federal officers from legitimate threats and protecting immigration enforcement operations from public scrutiny.
“We will respond when anyone, including a federal law enforcement officer, faces a legitimate threat to their safety,” Smith wrote. “We will not withhold emergency assistance simply because the person requesting help is an ICE agent.”
She continued by explaining that being followed or observed does not automatically establish a threat.
“Being followed is not, by itself, evidence of a threat. Being observed is not a crime. Photographing or recording law enforcement activity in public does not, by itself, justify police intervention.”
Smith said officers would not interfere with lawful activities merely because federal agents were uncomfortable with being observed.
The restrictions build on Sacramento’s existing immigration policies.
An earlier City Council staff report and proposed resolution addressed the use of municipal property and facilities for civil immigration enforcement.
The city subsequently adopted a Community Immigration Action Plan in June, establishing a framework for employee training, public information, coordinated response procedures, community partnerships and oversight.
According to the city’s immigration enforcement policy webpage, the plan is intended to help municipal employees and residents understand their rights and responsibilities during federal immigration operations.
That training component has become the subject of a separate controversy involving the Sacramento Police Officers Association.
In a public statement, the police union criticized the city’s decision to partner with NorCal Resist to provide training for municipal employees.
“The Sacramento Police Officers Association is deeply concerned that the City has chosen to partner with NorCal Resist to provide training for City employees,” the association wrote.
The union alleged that people associated with the organization had repeatedly engaged in hostile and confrontational behavior toward police officers, including verbal harassment and interference during law enforcement activities.
“Our officers have reported being verbally harassed, interfered with, and obstructed during lawful law enforcement activities,” the association stated.
The statement did not identify specific incidents, police reports or criminal cases supporting those allegations.
The association said it supported educating city workers about their constitutional and legal rights but objected to the selection of NorCal Resist as a training provider.
“City employees should receive accurate, balanced, and objective information from trusted sources that promote cooperation and respect for the rule of law,” the statement said.
The union also raised concerns about police staffing and morale, criticizing city leaders for inviting an organization it considers hostile to law enforcement while those issues remain unresolved.
NorCal Resist provides assistance to immigrants and their families, including immigration bond support, legal resources, community education and advocacy.
Its Know Your Rights program offers training on constitutional protections during encounters with immigration agents and police, including what individuals can do when federal agents approach them at home or in public.
The organization says its training is available to community organizations, faith groups and other institutions in English and Spanish.
Sacramento’s immigration action plan establishes employee training as a city objective, but the publicly available documents reviewed for this article do not establish the precise terms of any agreement with NorCal Resist or identify the curriculum the organization will present to city employees.
The controversy comes amid reports of increased immigration enforcement activity across Northern California.
In an Oct. 22 report by CapRadio published by KALW, Garcia said NorCal Resist had experienced a substantial increase in requests to monitor possible federal enforcement operations.
“We’ve had about between 20 and 50 dispatches per day and we are logging confirmed detainment intake almost every single day,” Garcia said.
The organization previously handled approximately 10 to 20 such dispatches in a typical week, according to Garcia.
ICE, meanwhile, defended the importance of partnerships with local law enforcement.
In a statement reported by FOX40, an agency spokesperson said cooperation with local law enforcement is critical to providing resources needed to arrest people the agency describes as criminal undocumented immigrants.
The statement did not directly address the distinction in Sacramento’s directive between responding to credible threats and providing operational assistance during immigration enforcement.
The Sacramento Police Officers Association has also said its members do not want to engage in immigration enforcement and would continue responding when criminal conduct requires police intervention, according to CBS Sacramento.
Smith’s directive does not determine whether officers involved in the Oct. 27 stop violated city policy or state law. That question depends on the circumstances of the reported reckless driving, the basis for the detention and any communications between Sacramento police and federal immigration agents.
The letter instead establishes procedures governing future requests for police assistance, requiring dispatchers and supervisors to identify an independent public safety justification before deploying officers.
“Our role is public safety, not immigration enforcement,” Smith wrote. “We will protect people facing legitimate danger, regardless of who they are, but we will not allow our officers or resources to be used as an extension of ICE operations.”
To comment please go to one of these social media platforms:
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/DavisVanguard
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/peoples-vanguard-of-davis-inc/
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/davisvanguard/
X: https://x.com/davisvanguard
Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/vanguardnewsgroup.bsky.social
Subscribe to the Vanguard News letters. To make a tax-deductible donation, please visit davisvanguard.org/donate or give directly through ActBlue. Your support will ensure that the vital work of the Vanguard continues.
