Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Immigration Policy topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

South Bend council discusses immigrant‑protection resolution, defers vote to next meeting

South Bend City Council · February 12, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Councilors reviewed attorney edits to a proposed resolution aimed at reassuring immigrant residents, heard public testimony about fear and recent ICE activity, and directed staff to circulate redrafted resolution and a proclamation for a vote at the next meeting.

South Bend’s City Council discussed a proposed resolution intended to reassure immigrant residents at its Feb. 9 meeting but did not take a vote, instead asking staff to circulate a revised resolution and a nonbinding proclamation and place an action item on the next agenda.

Council members said they supported issuing a public statement but expressed concern about legal exposure in the original draft after receiving redline edits from the city attorney. One council member summarized the attorney’s advice, saying the original wording “could be hanging our ears out there a bit, and get in some trouble legally,” and noted the city’s dependence on federal grants as a reason to avoid language that might create private liability.

Public comment featured multiple residents urging action to protect immigrant neighbors. London Espinosa Kennedy, who identified themself as a Pacific County constituent, urged adoption and said the resolution “does not change laws or policies, and it does not tie the hands of law enforcement.” Kennedy also recounted a recent ICE arrest in Shoreline and told the council, “We will follow the law. We will protect you.”

Council discussion focused on two options recommended by staff and the attorney: a revised, legally reviewed resolution that would be binding if adopted, or a proclamation that would express sentiment without creating legal obligations. Council members asked staff to prepare a side‑by‑side draft of a proclamation and the revised resolution, circulate the drafts to council, and bring the item back as an action item at the next meeting for a formal vote.

The item was listed as a discussion on the Feb. 9 agenda; no formal motion to adopt either a resolution or proclamation was made during the meeting.