|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
Dozens of residents and members of the progressive advocacy group Indivisible Tri-Valley held a vigil last week at Pleasanton’s Civic Park to honor people recently killed by federal immigration agents.
Following an hour of speeches and sign-holding, the group marched across the street to attend the Pleasanton City Council meeting where several reiterated pleas for the council to consider agendizing a resolution to oppose any plans to convert a shuttered prison in Dublin into an immigration detention center.
While it was the latest in several recent attempts to agendize such a resolution, the council majority felt the city should maintain its course in monitoring the situation and remaining in contact with neighboring cities in case those plans are confirmed.
“I take seriously my responsibility as mayor to carefully consider when the city should adopt a formal policy or position on matters that are outside our municipal boundaries and authority,” Mayor Jack Balch said July 27. “It’s not an easy decision, particularly when emotions are running understandably high … but based upon the information currently before us, I do not support a formal resolution at this time.”
“If the facts change, I will re-evaluate the position,” Balch added.
Advocates first began showing up to the city’s council meetings in May after the federal Bureau of Prisons issued a new report for the Federal Correctional Institution, Dublin, which many speculated to be the first step in the process to repurpose the facility as a detention center for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
FCI Dublin was a low-security women’s prison that closed in 2024 due to prison guards sexually abusing incarcerated women, infrastructure problems and other documented issues.Â
Last year, reports also emerged that President Donald Trump’s administration was considering reopening the Dublin facility as a detention center for immigrants, which prompted local leaders at the city of Dublin and Alameda County to publicly denounce those considerations through resolutions. There are no ICE detention centers in Northern California — most people detained by ICE go to centers located in the Central Valley.
After hearing from residents in May, the Pleasanton council majority decided not to agendize the discussion. But, shortly after, the Livermore City Council decided to look into what its city could do to oppose any such plans to open a detention center in Dublin, which prompted the Pleasanton City Council to follow suit during its June 16 meeting.
Following the council’s direction, Pleasanton city staff published a memorandum on July 7 regarding the status of the FCI Dublin facility and any potential plans to convert it into a detention center.
The memo details how neighboring agencies has responded to the idea of the detention center being built in Dublin and how the city received a “letter from the Department of Homeland Security stating that ICE is not planning to use FCI Dublin as a detention facility”.
“The letter states that the facility was not included in the February 6, 2025, inter-agency agreement with the Bureau of Prisons to allow ICE to house immigration detainees at various Bureau of Prisons institutions throughout the United States,” the memo reads.
Still, that hasn’t stopped members of the community from expressing their concerns – particularly after the recent deaths of Lorenzo Salgado Araujo, an immigrant and father who was shot and killed by ICE agents during a traffic stop in Houston, Texas, and Johan Sebastian Guerrero, who had a social security number and a work permit, before he was killed by ICE agents in Biddeford, Maine.
According to news reports, Guerrero was not the target of that particular operation as they were looking for someone else.
Aurora Nicolas, a Pleasanton native who also spoke out about these issues back in June, pointed out during public comment July 27 how just one week prior the Alameda County Immigration Legal Education Partnership confirmed ICE’s presence in downtown Livermore.
According to a July 18 post, ACILEP said by the time members of the organization went to check in on the situation, ICE had left the location. No arrests were confirmed.
“The concern is no longer if ICE comes or even when ICE comes,” Nicolas said. “The concern is now that ICE is here, what will you, the mayor and City Council, do to protect us, the residents of Pleasanton and our beloved community?”
While there were a couple of people who said that having a detention center in Dublin would ensure detainees in the Bay Area stay closer to home or that the plans haven’t been confirmed, the overwhelming majority wanted to see Pleasanton take action.
That’s why, during matters initiated, Councilmember Jeff Nibert introduced yet another motion to agendize a discussion on adopting such a resolution. He and Councilmember Julie Testa have been the only two members on the dais who have voiced support for getting the discussion on the books over the past couple months.
During his comments, Nibert pulled out his passport and noted how many people in the Tri-Valley, including two Livermore councilmembers, are now walking around with their own passports out of fear of ICE enforcement.
He said the staff time to look into such a resolution is minimal, which is why he once again urged the council to support his motion to agendize the discussion.
“We look out for each other in the city,” Nibert said. “We respond with empathy. We listen to and support one another. There are members of our community that are hurting, members of our community that are being targeted and feel a sense of fear … those feelings are real.”
Testa supported Nibert’s motion after hearing the “passionate and heartfelt testimonies” from the public and given what she had seen in the community.
“I know, personally, people who are fearful, who are reluctant to leave their homes,” Testa said. “We should send a message and unite the Tri-Valley in opposing any possibility of the ICE detention center in Dublin.”
Councilmember Craig Eicher, who was not at the last meeting the topic was brought up, chose to read a letter the council received which he said sums up his thoughts on the overall situation.Â
The person who wrote the letter said they were supportive of the council’s decision to monitor the possibility of an ICE facility coming to Dublin and remaining in contact with neighboring cities regarding the matter, in case things change.Â
However, the letter also noted how there is “currently no proposal to use the FCI facility in Dublin as an ICE detention facility and DHS has explicitly stated that it has no plans to use the facility for immigration detention”. That is a point that a handful of people reiterated to the council during public comment as a reason why Pleasanton shouldn’t spend time on a resolution.
The letter also states that the writer did not agree with the sentiment that if someone on the council or the public does not agree with having the city pursue a resolution, they must support ICE.
“That is an unfair and divisive false choice,” Eicher read from the letter. “Pleasanton is being asked to spend public time and resources opposing a hypothetical action involving a facility the city neither owns, nor controls and recognizing those facts is not support for ICE.”
Balch ended the discussion by saying he is also concerned — and understands residents’ concerns — about the possibility of the former Dublin prison facility being converted into an ICE detention center.
“The safety of our community members is paramount to me,” Balch said. “I am also, as I’ve stated before, deeply troubled by the actions ICE are taking against our immigrant community. People who are family, neighbors and friends.”
He added how ICE tactics undermine the “hard-earned trust” local law enforcement have been trying to build with the public.
“It seems to me to be advancing cruelty just as much as anything else,” Balch said. “And it is not consistent with my values.”
Balch reiterated how important it is for the city to continue monitoring the FCI Dublin facility to see what will happen, but held his stance that the city should limit itself to just monitoring, at least until they see any actual credible threat of a detention center being proposed at that location.
Court records reveal abuse allegations before fatal shooting in Dublin parkSeptember 30, 2026 9:17 am
Parents-in-law accused of killing Dublin man, New York Times staffer at sports parkSeptember 27, 2026 5:51 pm
