Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Immigration Office Local Oversight topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Carmel residents urge council to oppose ICE office as lawyers say city lacks power to block lease
Summary
Dozens of Carmel residents urged the Common Council to condemn a new ICE administrative office and press for protections for immigrants. City and outside counsel told the council municipal law likely cannot bar ICE from leasing private space, leaving residents seeking symbolic declarations and oversight steps.
Dozens of residents urged the Carmel Common Council on April 20 to take a formal stand against a recently opened U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement administrative office and to demand transparency and safeguards for immigrant neighbors.
Sharon Bowler, head of the local nonprofit From Strangers to Neighbors, told the council the city's ICE FAQ "falls short" for refugee families and asked elected officials to "issue a formal statement letting ICE know they aren't welcome in this community." She said such a statement would reassure immigrants that Carmel values them.
"A statement from Carmel saying, we don't want ICE here — we don't support the policies and actions of ICE — would be powerful," Bowler said.
Other residents made similar appeals. Joey Basu, speaking as a Carmel resident, asked the council to direct the Carmel Police Department to monitor any local ICE activities "to ensure compliance with constitutional standards and adherence to their stated, 'administrative only' scope." Lorena Lane, a Mexican immigrant and 20‑year Carmel resident, urged the council to adopt a resolution affirming that the city "takes a stand against ICE violence in our community" and to press for transparency about federal operations.
Several speakers described fear and alleged racial profiling by federal agents. Stephanie Stewart recounted seeing "people pulled over all the time" and called for a formal statement and accountability measures. Henry Winkler called ICE "a corrosive, ugly presence" that has produced "cruelty" and urged Carmel to reject it on moral grounds.
Before public comment, the council allowed two attorneys — one outside counsel and a city attorney — to explain legal limits. Sergey Gertrzukin of the city's corporation counsel and the city attorney (identified as Ted in remarks) told the council that, because ICE is a federal agency leasing privately owned space, the city lacks authority to prevent a private landlord from leasing to ICE. Gertrzukin said the municipal code and state law do not give the city power to control private leasing, and the city attorney cautioned the Supremacy Clause and state legislation (cited in the meeting as Senate Bill 76) could make any local restriction legally precarious.
"We simply don't have that authority under any of our city ordinances or under our state law or federal law," Gertrzukin said. The city attorney added that actions which burden a federal agency could be illegal under the Constitution.
Council members acknowledged the limits counsel outlined but said they take residents' concerns seriously. Council President Snyder said the city will "continue listening" and focus on what is within local control, including improving information on the city's FAQ and considering constructive, actionable steps to support residents.
The council did not introduce a resolution or formal motion on ICE during the meeting. Several residents asked for continued oversight, clearer communications about any staffing changes at the federal office, and for the police department to be given direction the council believes is legally permissible.
The council did not hold a substantive back‑and‑forth with public commenters during the designated public comment period; President Snyder said the goal was to hear from residents and then consider follow‑up within the council's legal capacity.
