Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Immigration Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents urge Kent County to adopt sanctuary policies, end cooperation with ICE
Summary
More than a dozen speakers during public comment urged the Kent County Board of Commissioners to adopt sanctuary protections, stop sharing surveillance data and block contracts that facilitate deportations. Commissioners and county staff said some immigration authority rests with federal agencies and noted limits on county jurisdiction.
Dozens of residents and advocates used the county’s public-comment period to call on the Kent County Board of Commissioners to adopt sanctuary policies and to stop local cooperation with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).
Speakers representing immigrant-rights groups, students, community organizers and residents described recent arrests, alleged unmarked detentions and family separations and urged the board to prohibit county cooperation with ICE, ban ICE detention centers in Kent County and stop sharing surveillance data that could be used by federal immigration authorities.
Why this matters: Speakers said local cooperation with federal immigration enforcement undermines trust, harms families and chills participation in schools and community life. Several called on the board to adopt clear written protections to prevent county facilities and data from being used in immigration enforcement.
What speakers said
- Sharon Smith (public comment): Smith described a recent arrest she experienced during a civil-disobedience action and said neighbors were fearful that men in unmarked cars were detaining Hispanic residents. “It is what we're seeing happening around the country. It is terrifying,” Smith said.
- Alizee Juarez (organizer): Juarez urged commissioners to “adopt sanctuary policies, prohibit Kent County cooperation with immigration and customs enforcement, and withdraw support from private entities that profit from ICE contracts, such as Veil Airlines,” and said ICE deportations are “violent, incite terror, and are happening here in Kent County.”
- Lauren Coleman (community activist): Coleman said the sheriff’s office’s expanded real-time information center raised concerns because some local residents cannot tell whether people making stops are official federal agents. “Other entities of law enforcement don't wear masks. They don't ride in unmarked vehicles and kidnap people off the side of the road,” Coleman said.
- Jose Rodriguez (community activist, Grand Rapids Public Schools board member): Rodriguez asked the board, “Do you care for all residents of Kent County?” and pressed for a sanctuary policy that “explicitly states our support for immigrant communities and rejects any efforts to work with ICE to detain any of our community members.”
Speakers also asked the county to: end ICE holds at the county jail, prohibit sharing license-plate-reader and camera images with ICE, and end airport authority relationships that they said support deportation flights.
County response and limits on action
County staff told the board the county is a creature of the state and that some immigration policy falls outside county jurisdiction. During the meeting the sheriff’s office said it does not have any contracted relationship with ICE and that ICE is a federal law-enforcement agency that may be involved in co-jurisdictional criminal investigations. The sheriff’s office said it will share investigative data with ICE when it is part of a criminal investigation.
Ending
Speakers left the board with concrete demands — sanctuary policies, an end to ICE holds and limits on data sharing — and commissioners were urged to adopt noncooperation measures. County staff cautioned that a nonbinding local resolution on immigration may be largely symbolic because Michigan law and county authority constrain local officials’ ability to stop federal enforcement actions.
