Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Immigration Ice Contract topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents urge Cumberland County commissioners to end ICE cooperation as LD 1971 nears law
Summary
Multiple residents told commissioners at a year‑end meeting to terminate arrangements they say enable ICE arrests; commissioners said state and federal law and existing operational obligations complicate immediate termination and pledged to seek legal clarity.
Dozens of residents urged the Cumberland County Board of Commissioners to end county cooperation with U.S. immigration enforcement during public comment at the board’s meeting.
Shelby Layton, a South Portland resident, told commissioners the governor plans to let LD 1971 become law and said ‘‘a law enforcement agency may not use agency or department money or personnel to detain a person for immigration enforcement purposes,’’ arguing that change and newly released deportation‑data figures make ending the county’s contract urgent. Layton cited data from the Deportation Data Project stating ‘‘there were 27 people arrested between January [and] October 2025 at the Cumberland County Jail,’’ many of whom were then sent out of state.
Other speakers described personal and moral impacts. Reverend Allison Smith said there are mothers in the jail now who ‘‘will not be home for Christmas because of our contract with ICE’’ and urged commissioners they could end the contract immediately so the county ‘‘will not incarcerate people who are from different states and be a cog in the wheel of this brutal system.’’ Paula Tabasque said the decision is ‘‘fundamentally incompatible’’ with values she associates with her holiday observance. Jack O’Brien, a Brunswick professor, criticized the county’s stance on financial grounds and quoted correspondence raising the county’s expected revenue from related activity; he called the argument that a modest tax impact justifies continued cooperation ‘‘a shameful opinion.’’
County officials and the sheriff described legal and operational constraints. The sheriff told the board his office will ‘‘continue to follow whatever law is precedent’’ and that there is confusion in the near term about which provisions in the amended bill and related directives will apply. A commissioner noted there is a federal and state obligation for local jails to accept prisoners and that a previous directive from a state corrections commission required acceptance of ICE detainees; the chair also warned that eliminating the county’s reimbursements could shift costs to taxpayers, citing an estimate that doing so could raise property taxes (the chair said it could be up to 4%).
Commissioner comments showed divergence: some said LD 1971, as amended, may not immediately change current sheriff operations and urged residents to press their state legislators in Augusta; others said the commission continues to collect information and may seek technical assistance or legal analysis to determine options. No vote or formal decision to end county cooperation with ICE was taken at the meeting; commissioners closed public comment and said they will pursue further work and legal review before considering any contract changes.
The board did not adopt or rescind any county contract related to federal detention during the meeting; the issue was the subject of extensive public comment and commissioner discussion and is expected to return for further consideration.
