Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Immigration Police Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Worcester council asks manager and solicitor for report on ICE enforcement, city policy after public concern
Summary
City leaders voted to request a report from the city manager and city solicitor clarifying Worcesters obligations and policies if federal immigration enforcement operates locally. The council and public sought clarity after residents expressed fear that ICE activities could disrupt families and local services.
The Worcester City Council voted to request the city manager and city solicitor provide a report clarifying the city—s policies and required responsiveness to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) enforcement actions.
The two related orders (filed as 10g by Mayor Petty and 10I by Vice Chair King) asked the manager and solicitor to detail the city—s policies when federal immigration authorities undertake enforcement and to include a legal opinion on whether city employees could be at risk of arrest for failing to comply with an ICE request. The order also asked the administration to confirm whether local law enforcement is guided by the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court decision Lund v. Commonwealth, which the council heard described during the meeting.
Chief Keith Saucier of the Worcester Police Department told the council the department follows Lund v. Commonwealth and does not perform civil immigration detentions: “we do not do civil detention arrests,” he said on the record. He said the department will assist other law enforcement agencies when the request concerns apprehension for criminal conduct.
Mayor Joseph Petty and councilors said they had heard from fearful residents and families and asked the administration to distribute clear guidance. Petty said school administrators had circulated a 2017 policy to principals and staff so that school personnel know how to respond if federal agents appear at a school. Councilors and the city manager asked the administration to compile accessible information for immigrant communities, including the city—s practice about cooperation with federal authorities and how that practice interacts with state case law.
Why it matters: Multiple residents testified that families were staying home from work and school out of fear of federal enforcement actions. Councilors emphasized that uncertainty about enforcement can have immediate public-safety and economic effects, and they urged rapid, practical guidance and outreach to vulnerable residents.
What happens next: The council referred the orders to the city manager and solicitor and asked for a report that: (1) describes current Worcester Police Department practice; (2) explains relevant Massachusetts law, including Lund v. Commonwealth; (3) clarifies whether city employees might be at legal risk if they refuse certain federal requests; and (4) outlines recommended communications and outreach steps the city should take to inform residents and partner agencies.
At the meeting the manager—s office and public-safety staff said they would prepare materials for distribution and suggested using libraries, senior centers and other municipal buildings as “safe places” and working with community organizations to disseminate information.
Sources: On-the-record statements by Chief Keith Saucier, Mayor Joseph Petty, Councilor King, and the city manager; the council referred the items to the manager and solicitor for a report back to the council.
