The Los Angeles City Council voted Friday to tighten policies around the use of city resources for federal immigration enforcement.

In a vote of 12 to 0, the council asked city attorneys to write a new law that would prohibit the use of city personnel or immigration enforcement resources. The law would also bar federal immigration authorities or other entities related to immigration enforcement from accessing city databases or anyone’s personal information.

City Council members Bob Blumenfield and John Lee were absent from Friday’s vote.

LA’s proposal, referred to the council as a “sanctuary city” bill, would essentially codify existing policies, including a 2017 executive directive from then-mayor Eric Garcetti.

If passed, the law would be similar to the one in San Francisco. That law prohibits city employees from using city funds or resources to assist U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE, officials in enforcing federal immigration laws, unless such assistance is required by federal or state law.

The board also requested a report on Friday detailing any “current gaps” between LAPD Special Order No. 40, a department policy that prohibits police officers from contacting anyone for the sole purpose of learning their immigration status, and Garcetti’s 2017 directive. The council also requested a report on cases where city departments have assisted ICE.

Those reports are designed to answer outstanding questions about the city’s existing policies.

The motion passed by the council on Friday says the policy allows ICE agents to access city jails to question people in LAPD custody. The motion also states that LAPD officers may transfer individuals to ICE custody even if no court order has been issued.

On Friday, however, the LAPD disputed such claims.

LAPD Captain Anthony Otero, assistant commander of the department’s Custody Services Division, said the LAPD does not allow ICE to enter LAPD prisons to question people. Otero also said the LAPD does not transfer people to ICE custody without a court order.

Otero describes the LAPD’s relationship with ICE

the

ICE will “occasionally send us a fax for individuals we have in custody, after which we will follow our policies.”

Asked to describe its “policy,” the LAPD The Times did not immediately provide an answer.

The “sanctuary city” motion was brought forward earlier this year by councilors Nithya Raman, Eunisses Hernandez and Hugo Soto-Martnez. It was assisted by Councilors Curren Price and Heather Hutt.

Some of their colleagues asked for more clarity on the city’s policies during a city council committee hearing on the motion in March.

Councilwoman Monica Rodriguez, who represents the northeastern San Fernando Valley, said at that meeting she was “baffled” by suggestions that the local government is collaborating with ICE.

“But more importantly, the suggestion that the city has not yet adopted these principles,” she said.

Rodriguez also said at that meeting that there were “unintended consequences” because of the city’s immigration policies.

She said that when President Biden took office, the city tried to participate in the reunification of children separated from their immigrant families, but had to leave that work to Los.

Angles Angeles

District.

“We couldn’t participate because of the policies we adopted,” Rodriguez said.

Senate Bill 54, California’s so-called state law, passed in 2017. In 2019, the LA City Council passed a resolution declaring LA a “sanctuary city,” but the move lacked legal teeth.

After LA city attorneys draft the ordinance, supported by council members at Friday’s meeting, it will return to council for a vote.