Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Immigration Detention topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Public commenters urge Berks County to rethink cooperation with ICE detention plans
Summary
At the June 19 meeting, two public commenters accused county leaders of insufficient transparency and urged Commissioners to reconsider cooperation with ICE on a proposed detention facility, citing alleged mistreatment in ICE custody and asking for records on detention durations.
Several members of the public used the Berks County commissioners meeting on June 19 to press the board on its relationship with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, asking the commissioners to withdraw support or demand greater access and transparency for any facility holding immigrants.
Jane Palmer told the commissioners she was skeptical of assurances that detainees would be treated humanely, calling those assurances "a fig leaf" and saying, "I beg you to rethink your relationship with these guys." Palmer alleged that more than 50 people have died in ICE custody since January 2025 and said that "as of the end of May, Berks had released 96 people into the hands of ICE." She also referenced elected officials being denied access to some facilities and urged the board to change course.
Craig Schaeffer, identified in the record as a Cumru Township resident, criticized what he called a lack of transparency from Commissioners Linebach and Rivera and said he had repeatedly asked the same questions without receiving answers. Schaeffer asked the board directly: "Have you detained any people longer than 48 hours? If so, for how long and where is that information recorded?"
The board did not provide answers or a substantive response during the meeting. After the two comments were read, the chair asked if there were any board comments; none were offered and the meeting moved to adjournment.
Why it matters: public commenters framed the issue as both a human-rights and transparency concern and asked for records and clearer oversight. The county’s next procedural steps, if any, were not announced during the meeting.
What’s next: The public record in this meeting does not include a response from the commissioners or any staff pledge to provide the requested detention records. The matter may reappear at future meetings or in written public-record responses.
