South Berwick council approves joint town-police statement on immigration enforcement, 3-1

The South Berwick Town Council approved a joint statement with the town—s police department addressing local responses to federal immigration enforcement on Feb. 10, voting 3-1 after more than an hour of public comment.

The council adopted a statement written with input from the police department and the town manager that emphasizes constitutional policing and directs residents to call 911 if they observe perceived enforcement activity, a point councilors said came from the police chief. "That instruction came directly from the police department and came from the police chief," a councilor said during discussion.

Supporters at the meeting said the text protects residents and affirms the town—s values. "This is a dangerous time for immigrants and for local law enforcement, and I applaud our town and police department's willingness to step up and protect all residents of South Berwick in a very complex and dangerous time," said Alicia Delos Reyes, who described her family's history of immigration during public comment.

Other speakers urged caution or changes. Melissa Castell, who said the statement had been published only Monday morning, told the council it would be in the town's interest to allow more time for public review and discussion before taking action. A different commenter urged the council to include references to crimes allegedly committed by "illegal aliens," a claim other residents disputed in the meeting.

Council debate focused on clarity and on the decision to use the word "resident" rather than "citizen." One councilor said the intent was inclusion: "A person can be a resident of this community and not be a citizen," a supporter of the wording said. Another councilor said the choice raised concerns about his oath and whether it was being construed as allowing undocumented residency; that councilor voted against final approval.

The council noted the statement's joint drafting with the police department and the role of the chief in recommending operational guidance. The meeting record shows significant public interest on both sides: multiple residents praised the statement as respectful and constitutional, while others asked for more time to review the language or objected to specific phrasing.

The council did not amend the statement on the floor; the adopted motion was reported as approved by voice vote 3-1. The council did not announce further amendments; next procedural steps would be distributing the statement online and monitoring any implementation details that came from police operations.

Provenance: The discussion, the public comments cited above, and the final vote are recorded in the meeting transcript during the public-comment period and the council debate that followed.