Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the ICE Contracts topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents press Butler County to end contract with ICE during public comment
Summary
Dozens of residents urged Butler County commissioners to end the county's contract with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, citing jail roster data, family separations and allegations of abusive tactics; one resident urged retaining the contract and another asked about legal risk.
Dozens of residents used the board's public comment period Dec. 23 to urge Butler County commissioners to terminate the county's contract with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).
Dana Miller of Oxford told commissioners she reviewed the county jail roster and a random 100‑person sample and reported that “36 or 36% were held on ICE detainers.” Miller said she then checked Butler County common pleas court records and found that “approximately 97 percent of ICE detainees in the sample had no felony cases in Butler County.” Miller asked whether the county could legally refuse to house immigrants “unless they have a committed crime” or pose a danger to the community.
Other speakers recounted personal and community impacts. Linda Snow Griffin of Fairfield Township described two Guatemalan men in her parish who were deported and said their families — including a teenage daughter who has known Butler County as home — are facing hardship. Sharon Meyer of Hamilton alleged ICE now uses “violent tactics” and masked officers who intimidate residents and said deputies are being diverted from county safety to ICE duties. Mike Meyer (Hamilton) framed the issue in historical terms and urged commissioners to end the contract. Anne Janssen (resident) also called for termination.
Not all public commenters supported ending the contract. Edward Patrick (Westchester) urged the county to “keep housing illegal aliens in the jail” and said the county should continue cooperating with ICE. A speaker identified only as Wayne (Fairfield Township) asked whether the county had assessed its legal exposure from the contract and encouraged steps to be “lawsuit proof.”
Board members did not take a formal vote on the ICE contract during the meeting. The public comment period concluded after several speakers; the meeting proceeded to announcements and adjourned later that morning.
The record of statements and the statistical example presented by Miller were not disputed on the record during the meeting. Commissioners did not announce immediate next steps on the ICE contract at the Dec. 23 session.
