Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Immigration Enforcement Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Advocates urge Taos County to adopt employee protections against immigration enforcement
Summary
Two community advocates told Taos County commissioners during public comment that the county should adopt clear employee and departmental policies limiting cooperation with federal immigration enforcement and train staff on those policies, citing examples from other New Mexico cities and concern for mixed‑status families.
Two community advocates urged the Taos County Board of Commissioners on July 15 to adopt formal policies protecting county employees and residents from federal immigration enforcement practices and to train staff across departments on those policies.
At the start of the public‑comment period, Steve Algazimo said he represents immigrant advocacy work and warned of an increasing probability of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement presence in the area. “We would ask you to have specific policies in place for all your departments as soon as humanly possible and have all your employees trained in them,” Algazimo said. He described detention‑center conditions in other parts of the state and urged the county not to “reinvent the field” when model policies already exist.
Betsy Martinez said she supports Algazimo’s request and asked the commission to adopt “strong policies comparable to what the other cities have in New Mexico,” naming Santa Fe, Albuquerque and Las Cruces as jurisdictions working on such policies. Martinez said the New Mexico ACLU’s “Freedom City” guidance has been used as a template by other municipalities.
Why it matters: Commenters said county policies could protect mixed‑status families, county employees and seniors from harassment and legal exposure, and provide consistent guidance to departments if federal enforcement activity increases.
Discussion vs. decision: The remarks appeared during the public‑comment period; commissioners did not take formal action during the meeting to adopt or study a countywide immigration‑enforcement policy.
Clarifying details provided by speakers: Algazimo said the number of ICE agents nationwide is increasing and referenced “about 10,000 new agents” (as stated by the speaker); he also said “some say as many as 40% of Taos County” households have someone who is not a citizen (speaker attribution only). Speakers cited existing city policies and stated those policies were vetted by attorneys general or legal advisers in those cities.
What was not decided: The commission did not vote on or direct staff to draft a policy during this meeting, and no county policy text or schedule was presented.
Community context: Speakers framed the request as a countywide public‑safety, legal and humanitarian issue that would affect residents and county employees if enforcement actions increase.
Ending note: Commissioners moved on after public comment; any next steps would require a future agenda item or formal direction by the commission.
