California and Santa Clara County filed a federal lawsuit Wednesday to halt construction of a planned ICE facility near Gilroy, arguing the site sits on three decades of documented chemical contamination — conditions officials say would expose detained immigrants to hazardous materials while a septic system designed for "modest daytime use" serves up to 150 detainees around the clock.

The legal challenge escalates a months-long conflict over a $26 million project that federal officials have characterized as a routine immigration office, even as 111-page blueprints obtained by San José Spotlight show holding rooms, visitation areas, spaces for mothers with infants, weapons storage, and tactical equipment rooms — a layout that county officials say is physically impossible on a rural agricultural parcel and legally impermissible under zoning rules in place since 1967.

The complaint, filed in the San Jose Division of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, names ICE, the Department of Homeland Security, and ECG 6 LLC — a Beverly Hills-based entity connected to a development firm called Elmwood Capital Group — as defendants. It seeks a preliminary injunction to stop demolition and construction already underway at 7240 Holsclaw Road, a roughly 25-acre parcel in South County.

Santa Clara County Counsel Tony LoPresti said the contamination findings were among the most alarming elements in the case. "We've uncovered three decades of documented leaks and spills of chemical compounds at this site," he said at a press conference alongside California Attorney General Rob Bonta. "The blueprints shockingly appear to call for a hookup to a sewer system. The closest sewer system is almost a mile away. And the septic system is designed for a modest daytime use, not for a 24/7 use with 60 employees and approximately 150 detainees."

The facility's existence came to light through investigative reporting by San José Spotlight, which first obtained and published the 111-page blueprints in early June after ICE had declined to share them. The documents detail holding rooms, visitation areas, spaces for mothers with infants, weapons and ammunition storage, and a fitness center for staff — a layout that contradicts the agency's repeated characterization of the project as merely an office.

"We can't tell from the blueprints exactly how ICE might classify this facility, but what we do know is alarming," LoPresti said. "It's the type of facility that's been the subject of lawsuits throughout the nation for warehousing people in inhumane conditions. It's the type of facility that has signaled increasing enforcement throughout the region."

The General Services Administration awarded a roughly $26 million, 20-year lease for an 18,700-square-foot building on the site on January 8, 2025 — in the final days of the Biden administration. ECG 6 LLC purchased the property just 22 days later. The land has been zoned exclusively for agricultural use since 1967 and has received property tax breaks under California's Williamson Act ever since, in exchange for maintaining that designation.

The lawsuit argues federal officials violated the National Environmental Policy Act, the Intergovernmental Cooperation Act, the Immigration and Nationality Act, the Administrative Procedure Act, and the Williamson Act by proceeding without environmental impact reviews, without consulting state or local authorities, and without legally required public feedback. The flooding-prone site's inadequate septic infrastructure, the complaint argues, makes any detention use not only illegal but potentially dangerous.

Bonta, whose office has now filed more than 70 cases against the Trump administration, tied the Gilroy project to documented failures at existing ICE facilities across California. "Instead of working to improve these conditions and treat detained individuals with the humanity and dignity they deserve, the administration is trying to jam in a new facility in a community that does not want it," he said. "Across the country, ICE has misused short-term holding facilities as de-facto long-term detention sites where people face overcrowding … without required safeguards."

Monterey County, which voted in May to review its own land use policies after learning of the project, has indicated it intends to join the lawsuit. District 1 Supervisor Sylvia Arenas, who represents South County, said the county was prepared for a sustained legal fight. "We have the experience, the resources and the qualified personnel to carry out this case," she said.

Rebeca Armendariz, a former Gilroy councilmember and organizer with Bay Resistance and the ICE OUT Coalition, argued the facility's South County location is strategic — positioned to extend the agency's reach into a region where highway logistics have historically limited ICE operations. "We knew that, together with a possible takeover of a federal prison in Dublin and this Gilroy facility, there could be an increase of ICE activity in the Bay Area," she told San José Spotlight. "They haven't been able to do it because they lack infrastructure in this area. And we're ready to push back."

ICE did not respond to requests for comment on the lawsuit by press time. An agency spokesperson had previously described the project only as an "ICE office."

LoPresti said demolition already underway on the site could release hazardous materials and sought the injunction on an expedited basis, though he could not offer a specific date for when the court might act.

The Dissent covered Santa Clara County's initial political opposition to the facility on May 28.