What has Mayor Bill Wells of El Cajon publicly proposed regarding cooperation with federal immigration authorities?
Executive summary
Mayor Bill Wells of El Cajon has publicly proposed that the city and its police department should “work with — not against — federal immigration enforcement,” seeking to allow local law enforcement to assist federal authorities in removing people he characterizes as criminals and to affirm that El Cajon is not a sanctuary city . He repeatedly framed the measure as a public‑safety effort and has pushed for language that would protect officers from legal and financial risks while asserting willingness to cooperate with the Trump administration’s deportation agenda despite California’s SB 54 limits .
1. What Wells actually proposed: authorize cooperation to remove criminals
Wells introduced a city council resolution declaring the city’s intent to cooperate with federal immigration enforcement so that “criminals who pose a risk to our residents are removed,” language he publicly posted and reiterated during council hearings . The original motion and later revisions make explicit that the purpose is to assist in the removal of violent or criminal suspects, with Wells saying the policy is about targeting criminals rather than immigrants generally .
2. Legal mechanics he sought: indemnity and compliance language
In later versions of the measure — including a version presented alongside Councilmember Steve Goble — the resolution added that the city would seek help from the U.S. attorney general to indemnify the city and police officers for assisting or cooperating with federal immigration authorities “as permitted by state law,” an effort clearly intended to blunt legal exposure under California statutes . Wells has also said the resolution was meant to clarify perceived conflicts between state sanctuary law SB 54 and federal directives [1] .
3. Political framing: public safety, Trump alignment, and constituency claims
Wells repeatedly cast his proposal as a straightforward public‑safety measure and aligned it with the Trump administration’s immigration priorities, saying he was “prepared to do whatever the federal government asks me to do” and that many local voters backed tougher enforcement [2]. He invoked community sentiment and national partisan divides — calling it part of a “cultural war” — and stressed that the measure represented constituents who voted for Trump .
4. Opposition, community reaction and counterarguments
The proposal drew vigorous opposition from residents and some council colleagues who warned it would terrorize immigrant communities, invite racial profiling, and contravene SB 54 protections that limit local cooperation with ICE, leading to rallies and more than 80 public speakers at hearings . Councilmembers who voted against Wells described the resolution as unnecessary or harmful to community trust, and the state attorney general intervened in related disputes such as data‑sharing with federal agencies .
5. The council fight and changing fortunes: defeated, retooled, then passed
Wells’ initial resolution was narrowly defeated in a 3‑2 council vote after a packed, emotional hearing, with opponents citing legal and moral concerns [2] . He and allies then revised the language to emphasize cooperation only “as permitted by state law” and to seek indemnification for officers, and subsequent votes produced different outcomes as the council continued to revisit the measure .
6. Practical uncertainties and limits of the proposal
Even as Wells publicly pushed for cooperation, reporting notes significant legal limits and ambiguity about what local police could lawfully do under SB 54, and sources show colleagues and legal observers debating whether the language would permit only convicted violent offenders to be referred to ICE or could extend to people merely accused . Available reporting documents Wells’ proposals, revisions, political motives and community reaction but cannot definitively predict how federal, state or court actions would enforce or block any future local cooperation beyond what the resolution states .