ALERT: Minimum Number of Detainees Confirmed at ICE Facility in California

Construction work on the ICE facility project near Gilroy remains halted. A court must first resolve a lawsuit filed by California and Santa Clara County against the Department of Homeland Security.

According to the most detailed official statement released to date, federal officials claim the center will normally house approximately 10 detainees. The figure appears in new court documents submitted last week in response to the lawsuit seeking to block the facility.

The detention space will be used solely to temporarily detain and process foreign nationals in immigration proceedings, according to the federal filing. This assertion directly contradicts estimates being used by state and county authorities.

A dispute over the facility’s actual capacity

The county and state lawsuit describes the facility as a project with serious environmental concerns. Federal documents characterize that lawsuit as an 800-page document full of questionable assumptions.

California Attorney General Rob Bonta and county counsel Tony LoPresti maintain that the center could house up to 150 detainees. Federal lawyers reject that figure, though they leave one important door open.

According to their own filing, the maximum capacity of the facilities will be determined once the renovation is completed. This ambiguity fuels distrust among activists and local officials about the project’s true scope.

What construction is planned and why it’s racing against the clock

Revelations about the facility, first reported in May, generated concern throughout the Bay Area. Many fear ICE is preparing a local expansion of the Trump administration’s mass deportation campaign.

Subsequently obtained blueprints detailed detainee processing areas, interview rooms, and waiting zones within the complex. According to the most recent documentation, the work would add office space to an already existing building.

The project also includes a security vestibule for access to an outdoor waiting area and a perimeter fence. ICE relies on this facility, located at 7240 Holsclaw Road, to strengthen its local immigration enforcement operations.

The document warns that construction delays could disrupt immigration operations in the area. The lease for ICE’s current office in Morgan Hill expires at the end of this month.

The lawsuit, filed in June, alleges that the federal government circumvented environmental laws and local zoning ordinances to advance the project. A hearing on the preliminary injunction request is scheduled for September 8 at the federal courthouse in San José.

Federal officials have already agreed to temporarily halt work until that date. Representatives of Bonta and LoPresti expressed confidence in the outcome of the lawsuit before San José Spotlight, characterizing the federal approach as a strategy of acting first and thinking later.

Contamination, secrecy, and activist response

Federal lawyers argue that the project should be exempt from comprehensive environmental assessments. The 25-acre parcel already houses an office building, and the proposed facility would not significantly change the land use, according to their position.

The original lawsuit alleges that decades of agricultural research at the site likely left hazardous materials. Federal officials respond that there is no evidence of active contamination. They also question why local authorities waited until now to act if the threat was so serious.

State and county officials further maintain that the project advanced in secret, violating federal local consultation laws. However, the lawsuit reveals that a leasing agent for the property owner, linked to Elmwood Capital Group, contacted the county in early 2023 to inquire about leasing the property to the federal government. According to the federal version, county officials themselves responded at that time that there would be no zoning problems for that use.

The ICE Out of Gilroy Coalition maintains strong skepticism about the official figures. Huy Tran, executive director of Services, Immigrant Rights and Education Network, told San José Spotlight he does not believe the center will only house ten people at a time.

According to Tran, the way the Department of Homeland Security operates suggests a different pattern. Its motto, he said, seems to be that if they build the facility, they will end up filling it completely.

This type of distrust is not isolated. Similar communities in other parts of the country have reported gradual expansions of detention centers that began with reduced capacities. The local coalition demands greater transparency before any additional work advances on the Holsclaw Road property.

For Hispanic families in the Bay Area, the judicial outcome on September 8 is critical. It will determine whether the Gilroy project moves forward as a reduced processing center or becomes a larger-scale facility. Meanwhile, the current halt in construction offers temporary relief to those opposed to the project.