motion

After escalating incidents of violence involving federal agents taking part in the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown, officials are looking to create “ICE-free” zones in L.A. County.

The Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors voted unanimously on Tuesday to bar immigration enforcement officers from county-owned spaces.

Lindsay Horvath, the District 3 supervisor, announced the motion to establish county property as “U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement-free” zones, prohibiting agents from staging, processing or operating in those areas.

“Los Angeles County will not allow its property to be used as a staging ground for violence caused by the Trump administration,” Horvath said at the Tuesday Board of Supervisors meeting.

The motion instructs county counsel to draft an ordinance for board consideration within 30 days.

The Times reached out to the Department of Homeland Security for comment but did not receive a response by publication.

Since June 6, 2025, when immigration enforcement officials descended on the region — raiding four businesses including a fast-fashion warehouse in downtown Los Angeles and detaining dozens — to the first month of 2026, Horvath said, “federal immigration enforcement has too often escalated into extreme violence.”

“Our federal government is freely, without cause, murdering its own citizens in broad daylight,” she said, “in front of witnesses and cameras.”

The action comes after multiple incidents of violence in California as well as last week’s fatal shooting in Minnesota of 37-year-old Renee Good by a federal immigration agent, which spurred outcry across the country. Good, a mother of three, has been portrayed by government officials as a domestic terrorist who tried to run down an agent with her vehicle. State and local officials in Minneapolis have rejected those claims.

On Friday in Southern California, a 21-year-old protester underwent six hours of surgery after a Department of Homeland Security agent fired a nonlethal round at close range at him during a protest. The protester is shown in video, his face covered in blood, being dragged by the neck by an agent. He suffered a fractured skull around his eyes and nose and permanently lost the vision in his left eye, according to family.

An off-duty ICE agent fatally shot Keith Porter Jr. at a Northridge apartment complex on New Year’s Eve. The officer suspected that Porter was an “active shooter,” according to the DHS. Porter was firing an assault-style rifle in what family members said was an act of celebration on New Year’s Eve.

“I think it’s really important for our communities to understand what we’re saying is, you don’t have the right to come in and harass people without a federal warrant,” said Hilda Solis, District 1 supervisor and co-author with Horvath of the motion. “If [federal agents] use our property to stage, then you need to show us documentation, a federal warrant, to back that up.”

Solis said she hoped city councils and other jurisdictions would be motivated to adopt their own ordinance to create “ICE-free” zones.

Prior to President Trump taking office in 2025, ICE agents were prohibited from conducting arrests and other enforcement activity in sensitive locations, including places of worship, schools and hospitals.

A DHS directive from Jan. 20, 2025, superseded that practice, saying that officers taking enforcement action in a sensitive location should use “discretion along with a healthy dose of common sense.”

Bay Area officials are also considering the adoption of “ICE-free” zones. Alameda County officials introduced a proposal for these designated zones in November; on Thursday, officials will incorporate feedback from the county’s sheriff, district attorney, probation department, and public defender, The Oaklandside reported.

The first “ICE-free” zone ordinance was established by Chicago in October barring immigration enforcement agents from property owned or controlled by the city.

As the state continues multiyear marathon discussions on rules for what residents in wildfire hazard zones must do to make the first five feet from their houses — an area dubbed “Zone Zero” — ember-resistant, the Los Angeles City Council voted Tuesday to start creating its own version of the regulations that is more lenient than most proposals currently favored in Sacramento.

Critics of Zone Zero, who are worried about the financial burden and labor required to comply as well as the detrimental impacts to urban ecosystems, have been particularly vocal in Los Angeles. However, wildfire safety advocates worry the measures endorsed by L.A.’s City Council will do little to prevent homes from burning.

“My motion is to get advice from local experts, from the Fire Department, to actually put something in place that makes sense, that’s rooted in science,” said City Councilmember John Lee, who put forth the motion. “Sacramento, unfortunately, doesn’t consult with the largest city in the state — the largest area that deals with wildfires — and so, this is our way of sending a message.”

Tony Andersen — executive officer of the state’s Board of Forestry and Fire Protection, which is in charge of creating the regulations — has repeatedly stressed the board’s commitment to incorporating L.A.’s feedback. Over the last year, the board hosted a contentious public meeting in Pasadena, walking tours with L.A. residents and numerous virtual workshops and hearings.

• Share via Close extra sharing options

Some L.A. residents are championing a proposed fire-safety rule, referred to as “Zone Zero,” requiring the clearance of flammable material within the first five feet of homes. Others are skeptical of its value.

With the state long past its original Jan. 1, 2023, deadline to complete the regulations, several cities around the state have taken the matter into their own hands and adopted regulations ahead of the state, including Berkeley and San Diego.

“With the lack of guidance from the State Board of Forestry and Fire Protection, the City is left in a precarious position as it strives to protect residents, property, and the landscape that creates the City of Los Angeles,” the L.A. City Council motion states.

However, unlike San Diego and Berkeley, whose regulations more or less match the strictest options the state Board of Forestry is considering, Los Angeles is pushing for a more lenient approach.

The statewide regulations, once adopted, are expected to override any local versions that are significantly more lenient.

The Zone Zero regulations apply only to rural areas where the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection responds to fires and urban areas that Cal Fire has determined have “very high” fire hazard. In L.A., that includes significant portions of Silver Lake, Echo Park, Brentwood and Pacific Palisades.

Fire experts and L.A. residents are generally fine with many of the measures within the state’s Zone Zero draft regulations, such as the requirement that there be no wooden or combustible fences or outbuildings within the first five feet of a home. Then there are some measures already required under previous wildfire regulations — such as removing dead vegetation like twigs and leaves, from the ground, roof and gutters — that are not under debate.

However, other new measures introduced by the state have generated controversy, especially in Los Angeles. The disputes have mainly centered around what to do about trees and other living vegetation, like shrubs and grass.

The state is considering two options for trees: One would require residents to trim branches within five feet of a house’s walls and roof; the other does not. Both require keeping trees well-maintained and at least 10 feet from chimneys.

On vegetation, the state is considering options for Zone Zero ranging from banning virtually all vegetation beyond small potted plants to just maintaining the regulations already on the books, which allow nearly all healthy vegetation.

Lee’s motion instructs the Los Angeles Fire Department to create regulations in line with the most lenient options that allow healthy vegetation and do not require the removal of tree limbs within five feet of a house. It is unclear whether LAFD will complete the process before the Board of Forestry considers finalized statewide regulations, which it expects to do midyear.

The motion follows a pointed report from LAFD and the city’s Community Forest Advisory Committee that argued the Board of Forestry’s draft regulations stepped beyond the intentions of the 2020 law creating Zone Zero, would undermine the city’s biodiversity goals and could result in the loss of up to 18% of the urban tree canopy in some neighborhoods.

The board has not decided which approach it will adopt statewide, but fire safety advocates worry that the lenient options championed by L.A. do little to protect vulnerable homes from wildfire.

Recent studies into fire mechanics have generally found that the intense heat from wildfire can quickly dry out these plants, making them susceptible to ignition from embers, flames and radiant heat. And anything next to a house that can burn risks taking the house with it.

Another recent study that looked at five major wildfires in California from the last decade, not including the 2025 Eaton and Palisades fires, found that 20% of homes with significant vegetation in Zone Zero survived, compared to 37% of homes that had cleared the vegetation.