Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Residents urge commissioners to oppose county cooperation with ICE 287(g) and warn of costs and civil-rights impacts

August 01, 2025 | Carroll County, Maryland


This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »

Residents urge commissioners to oppose county cooperation with ICE 287(g) and warn of costs and civil-rights impacts
Three residents urged the Carroll County Board of Commissioners on Thursday to decline or oppose local cooperation with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement under a 287(g) agreement, citing civil-rights concerns, potential local costs and community fear.
Jessica Hill, a Westminster resident, told the board she and others oppose the 287(g) agreement and said she only learned of it 11 days earlier. She said more than 600 people have signed a petition opposing the agreement and that protesters have demonstrated outside the county building. “What makes me feel safe in our county is protecting our Fifth Amendment,” Hill said, adding that she believes ICE is not upholding due process in some enforcement cases she cited.
Chelsea Crawford said local taxpayers should not shoulder costs to support ICE activity: “They have a almost $30,000 trillion budget. If they wanna do this, they can use that money,” she said, summarizing data she presented to the board about overtime, litigation and other local expenses experienced by some jurisdictions with 287(g) participation.
Andrew Manning spoke briefly on unrelated topics, then returned to public-safety themes and suggested community-focused training for officers.
President Kyler responded to the public comments by clarifying the county's role: the board adopts the sheriff's budget but does not control day-to-day operational decisions. Kyler encouraged residents to speak directly with the sheriff's office and noted the board could address funding choices during future budget cycles: “We fund the sheriff's office. We do an annual budget ... We do not control how they day to day spend the money. If they have something that's outside the budget, then they need to come to us.”
No formal action was taken by the commissioners on the 287(g) issue at the meeting; the public comment was recorded and commissioners offered the procedural clarification above.

Don't Miss a Word: See the Full Meeting!

Go beyond summaries. Unlock every video, transcript, and key insight with a Founder Membership.

Get instant access to full meeting videos
Search and clip any phrase from complete transcripts
Receive AI-powered summaries & custom alerts
Enjoy lifetime, unrestricted access to government data
Access Full Meeting

30-day money-back guarantee

Sponsors

Proudly supported by sponsors who keep Maryland articles free in 2025

Scribe from Workplace AI
Scribe from Workplace AI