Council committee hears that Boston Trust Act is working — but fear of enforcement is keeping people from school, work and care

The Boston City Council Committee on Public Safety and Criminal Justice on March 10, 2025 opened an audit of the 2014 Boston Trust Act and related dockets (0128 and 0414) to examine how the city’s policy limiting cooperation with civil immigration enforcement is being implemented.

“For the record, my name is Henry Santana, at large city councilor, and I am the chair of the Boston City Council Committee on Public Safety and Criminal Justice,” Chair Henry Santana said at the start of the hearing, which was livestreamed and included both in‑person and virtual testimony.

The hearing focused on the real‑world consequences panelists and public commenters said they see: immigrant families avoiding schools and health care, workers skipping shifts, small businesses losing customers, and persistent concerns about detention conditions in nearby facilities.

Why it matters: Councilors and community leaders said the Trust Act’s rules for Boston Police Department cooperation with federal authorities matter to public safety because fear of immigration enforcement discourages victims and witnesses from calling police, keeps children home from school, and drives people away from preventive health care. The city council’s stated goal for the audit is to identify places where the ordinance can be strengthened and to collect evidence to guide future action.

Panel testimony and examples

Councilor Julia Mejia, the lead sponsor of the hearing, told the panel the city is not there to debate whether the law should exist but to “center the reality” of how federal and local policies affect immigrant communities.

Several community organizers and service providers described a pattern of fear and misinformation. Suzanne Lee, an educator and former Boston public school principal, said students’ learning is harmed when families are anxious: “You cannot learn unless you have the mental capacity to feel safe and then open your mind to learn,” Lee said. She urged clearer, school‑level guidance for teachers, secretaries and other staff so they can respond consistently when families ask about immigration enforcement.

Health care professionals said fear is already driving patients away. Pediatrician and clinic medical director Dr. Franny Polanco Walters said families are delaying prenatal care and regular treatment for chronic disease: “When infectious diseases go untreated...delayed treatments leads to more severe illness, higher health care costs,” she said, arguing that health facilities must be explicitly treated as non‑enforcement spaces.

Business owners and labor organizers described fewer customers and workers skipping shifts because of immigration fears. Navya Pina, who owns several eateries and also works in Boston Public Schools, said lower foot traffic and worker anxiety reduce revenue and harm employees’ pay.

Legal and detention concerns

Legal and civil‑rights advocates asked the council to examine specific implementation decisions and to consider cutting city data‑sharing ties to federal immigration subagencies. Leah Hastings of Prisoners Legal Services outlined long‑standing complaints about conditions where ICE contracts beds, and noted a regional trend to expand detention capacity; she urged the council to end collaboration with “all subagencies of ICE” and with fusion‑center programs the council funds that share information with federal partners.

Council discussion and next steps

Councilors repeatedly said they wanted clearer, citywide materials for residents and training for front‑line city staff. Several councilors asked the administration to supply the annual reports the ordinance calls for; Chair Santana read the first page of a letter from the administration that Claire Kelly, director of intergovernmental relations, submitted for the record saying the administration would listen to the hearing and had provided materials including Mayor Michelle Wu’s recent testimony to Congress.

Councilor Ed Flynn highlighted a discrepancy he said exists between detainer counts reported by Boston Police and ICE (15 vs. 98) and said the council will seek clarification. No formal votes were taken during the hearing; councilors said this was the first in a series of planned hearings and that they would invite the Boston Police Department, Boston Public Schools and other city departments to future meetings.

Public testimony

Public commenters expressed sharply divergent views. Some urged greater cooperation with ICE and called for stricter enforcement; others praised the Trust Act as essential to public safety and urged expansion of legal services, “know‑your‑rights” outreach, translation of materials and funding for community legal assistance.

What the hearing did not decide

The committee took testimony and set out topics for further inquiry but did not adopt new ordinances or take formal action. Councilors asked for follow‑up information from the administration and planned future panels that will include law enforcement and additional city departments.

Ending

Chair Santana closed the docket by thanking panelists and the public and saying the council will continue hearings to “get this right.”