At the Sept. 2 meeting of the Butler County Board of Commissioners, multiple residents urged the commission to discontinue the jail contract between the Butler County Sheriff’s Office and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), saying the arrangement is inhumane and harms county residents. The board did not vote to end or pause the contract; later in the meeting commissioners recessed into an executive session citing pending or imminent litigation.

Why it matters: Speakers said the contract allows local detention of immigrants for civil immigration matters and raised concerns about due process, county liability and use of local resources. Several speakers referenced an opinion by Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost and asked the commissioners to respond publicly about why the contract was approved and whether the county will continue it.

Multiple speakers told the board they want the contract ended. “I would like to live in a community that's welcoming and supporting of all people who would like to live here,” said Dr. Anne Wengler, who identified herself as a member of Butler County for Immigrant Justice Group. “I think that the way that they're operating is cruel and unjust and unethical, and I ask you to discontinue that contract.”

Anne Jansen, a Hanover Township resident, told the commissioners she had read the attorney general’s opinion and asked the board either to pause the contract to allow more community input or to explain the basis for approving it. She asked directly whether “your contract with ICE” had been approved and voted on by all three commissioners and called for a pause if it had not been fully approved.

Sharon Meyer, a Hamilton resident, said the AG’s opinion “that immigrant detainees with a civil violation can be held” raised questions about indefinite detention and due process and asked the commissioners to explain why they approved the contract at the Feb. 25 meeting. “I request to know the reasons that each of you approved this contract,” she said, and asked for a public explanation to constituents.

Other speakers — including Grace Card, Linda Spear Spurrier and James Closterman — urged a public response and pressed the board to explain the fiscal and legal risks, including effects on county budgets should litigation continue or settlements be required.

Commissioner responses emphasized limits on the board's authority and noted the county’s obligations. “Were we to cancel a contract for housing illegally [sic] immigrants, the ICE operation — federally funded — would still go on just as it is now,” Commissioner Dixon said, arguing that cancelling the local contract would not eliminate ICE operations. Commissioners and Administrator Boyko also said staff have been noting and responding to constituent questions and that certain specifics related to pending litigation could not be discussed publicly.

No motion to rescind or amend the ICE contract was made during the public meeting. Later the commissioners voted to recess the regular session and convene an executive session to discuss, among other items, “disputes that are the subject of pending or imminent court action.” The board said no action would be taken publicly immediately following that executive session.

Clarifying details: the board adopted a public-comment procedure in a prior meeting limiting speakers to three minutes; at this meeting the board closed public comment before moving to commissioners’ remarks and the executive session. Speakers at this meeting said the ICE contract had been approved on Feb. 25; the board did not take any formal public vote on rescinding the contract at this meeting and directed legal and staff follow-up rather than immediate public action.

Ending: Commissioners announced they will continue executive and staff-level review; the board did not schedule a public vote on the ICE contract during the Sept. 2 meeting.