Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Immigration Enforcement Communications topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
St. James council to direct staff to draft policy clarifying interactions with federal immigration agents
Summary
At a July 7 work session, the St. James City Council discussed a draft public statement and whether to adopt a permanent policy clarifying the city’s role vis-à-vis federal immigration enforcement; staff will draft a policy and present it to council in the coming weeks. No formal vote was taken.
The St. James City Council took up concerns raised by residents and the advocacy group Watanau County Cares about recent immigration-enforcement activity and agreed to ask staff to draft a clear policy on how the city and police interact with federal and state agencies.
The matter was introduced at the July 7 work session as the council reviewed an ad hoc group’s report on community fears and requests for transparency. Chair (S1) recapped the group’s purpose and stressed the city’s limited role, saying, "Immigration enforcement is a federal responsibility and the city does not have authority over federal immigration law or ICE operations." The meeting did not include a formal vote.
Why it matters: Residents told the ad hoc group they wanted clearer public communication after enforcement activity that many described as alarming. Council members said a one-time statement risks being overlooked or misunderstood; several members favored a short, council-approved policy to ensure the city’s position is on the public record and could be reused in future incidents.
Paul (S5), who drafted a proposed statement for the council to consider, said, "I just did a draft, and passed it to everybody," and suggested appending a list of legal-aid and immigrant-resource links to any public message. Paul also offered an estimate that the community lost "50 plus" students this year and attempted to quantify related school funding impacts; council members questioned the underlying data and its attribution to enforcement activity.
City staff reported they had met with the superintendent, who told them annual student loss averages about 30–50 and that while some families likely left following enforcement actions, the superintendent could not definitively attribute the full loss to ICE operations. As one council member put it, the superintendent "wasn't confident correlating the loss of students to directly ICE operations." This exchange underlined council members’ caution about drawing causal links without corroborating data.
On next steps, the city manager (S4) proposed drafting "a short police policy that states essentially that we do not actively participate or assist in federal immigration activities unless law requires" and making it part of the city's policy book so it is publicly recorded. S4 said staff will work with "Brad" to prepare a draft and "present this within the next couple weeks." The council also discussed linking county resources on the city website rather than duplicating information, and noted website translation features and access barriers for residents without internet access.
Council members expressed two recurring concerns: avoid issuing a statement that could be read as promising complete noninvolvement where legal duties might require assistance, and ensure consistency with county policies so residents receive uniform information across jurisdictions. The council agreed that a written policy would be more durable than a one-off post and would set clear parameters for how the city handles interactions with federal and state agencies.
There was no formal motion or vote at the work session. Staff will produce a draft policy for council review and possible approval at a future meeting; the timeline discussed was delivery to council "within the next couple weeks."
