Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Comment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents press Newport council on detention facility, security contractor concerns and traffic safety
Summary
Public commenters warned about a potential ICE detention facility, urged action and litigation, raised allegations about a private security contractor receiving city funds, and presented petitions asking the city to address a dangerous Highway 101 intersection.
Several members of the public addressed the Newport City Council on Feb. 2, raising safety, health and traffic concerns.
Laurie Porter (Newport resident) urged the city to resist a proposed detention facility and described reports she said indicate use of crowd‑control agents at other sites. She said some county communications suggested a delay until May 1 and asked the council to act now, saying the community would mobilize to oppose any facility. Mayor Kaplan responded that the council voted Nov. 17 to oppose establishment of a detention facility in Newport and that the city is currently engaged in litigation to prevent it; staff added the declaration is public record and the city is monitoring developments.
AJ Bridal (resident, Rebel with Cause) asked council to review payments to TCV Security, alleging an officer assigned to Toledo faces harassment charges and noting the company's owner has faced separate charges; he said the company provides dispatch services and asked whether the city wants to fund it. In a later clarification, AJ reiterated that while all are presumed innocent until proven guilty, another woman had since come forward with similar allegations. The mayor thanked AJ for his comments; no formal inquiry or staff action was recorded in the meeting minutes.
Online commenter Naila Jevisek (retired attorney, Newport) presented petitions and maps documenting traffic and emergency‑egress problems at the Fred Meyer/20th Street intersection on Highway 101, told the council the city had listed the project as a top priority in the city’s transportation plan, and asked staff and the representative to advance a traffic-control solution; staff acknowledged receipt of materials and said they would follow up as appropriate.
The council acknowledged these comments and reiterated that, where litigation or active investigations exist, staff is limited in what it can disclose but will continue monitoring and pursue legal avenues where available.
