Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Detention Facility Local Impact topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Resident group raises sewer, environmental and safety concerns about proposed ICE facility in Roxbury; county says it has not been contacted
Summary
William Angus, representing the No ICE Northern Jersey Alliance, told the Morris County commissioners the site of a proposed ICE detention center in Roxbury lacks adequate sewer capacity and raises environmental concerns; Director Shaw replied that Route 46 is a state highway and that the county had not been contacted by federal agencies about the proposal.
William Angus, founder and lead coordinator of the No ICE Northern Jersey Alliance, used the public-comment period at the Morris County Board of County Commissioners’ Feb. 11 meeting to oppose a proposed ICE detention facility at an unused warehouse in Roxbury.
Angus told commissioners the warehouse is on Route 46 and that an engineer’s sewer study has rated the site’s sewer infrastructure for about 25,000 gallons per day; he said the proposed detention use would require roughly eight times that capacity and raised additional legal, environmental and public-safety concerns tied to the Highlands Act and Department of Environmental Protection rules. Angus said local groups are pursuing zoning and legal challenges through Roxbury.
Director Shaw responded that Route 46 is a state highway and that Morris County therefore does not have jurisdiction over that road. Shaw noted the county had not been contacted by any federal agency, including the Department of Homeland Security or Immigration and Customs Enforcement, regarding that site. He said the county’s primary concern is protecting the safety and well‑being of Morris County families and that municipal land‑use and infrastructure matters are managed by the township.
The board did not take any formal action on the matter during the meeting. Angus’s concerns were recorded in the public-comment record and county leadership’s response was limited to a statement on jurisdiction and lack of federal contact.
