Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Immigration Enforcement Local topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents press Calhoun commissioners on ICE actions and 287(g) warrant officer agreement
Summary
Multiple speakers at the Feb. 5 meeting urged the county to clarify policy and transparency around ICE activity and a local 287(g)-style warrant officer agreement; callers asked the sheriff and county officials to explain what the arrangement authorizes and to protect community trust.
Several residents used the public‑comment periods at the Feb. 5 Calhoun County Board meeting to press commissioners and the sheriff for clarity about immigration enforcement and a local warrant‑officer agreement.
Chris Vreeland of Fredonia Township opened citizen remarks by saying he had seen videos showing enforcement actions he described as unlawful and asked: "what you plan to do to protect the people of Calhoun County when and not if a similar unwanted invasion of ICE arrives." He called recent incidents "federally sponsored murder" and urged local elected officials to use their authority to protect residents.
Karen Weideman of Battle Creek reviewed models used in other Michigan counties and urged the board to examine limits on ICE presence on county property. She cited Washtenaw County’s recent vote to bar ICE from county buildings without a judge‑signed warrant and asked Calhoun officials to consider similar transparency measures.
Linda Pell of Converse Township addressed a separate but related local issue: the county’s new 287(g)-style warrant officer agreement. "My concern is local: how this new agreement affects public trust and the sheriff's own mission to guard the life, property and constitutional rights of all residents," Pell said, and asked Sheriff Hinkley and the commission to publicly explain the agreement and hold a forum where residents can ask questions.
David Begg of Marshall urged humane treatment and jail transparency for people detained in county custody and cited ACLU filings alleging inappropriate behavior by the county jail. Several speakers urged the county to make clear how migrants or detainees will be treated in the local system and whether local officers will carry out federal immigration functions.
Commissioners did not adopt any new policy during the meeting. Commissioner Dan Strowbridge and others acknowledged the requests for clarity; staff and the chair offered to meet individually with residents and to provide more public information. The chair said commissioners "do listen to the public comments" and offered to follow up with interested residents.
What's next: Residents asked for a public forum with Sheriff Hinkley explaining the 287(g)-style warrant officer agreement and for the county to clarify what county employees and contractors may legally do when federal agents operate locally.
