Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Sanctuary City Language topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Twisp public comments split over 'sanctuary city' language; residents voice safety and due-process concerns
Summary
During public comment the Twisp meeting drew sharply divided remarks on sanctuary-city language: some residents warned of threats and crime, others urged due process and community support. Speakers urged the council to stay within town authority.
Public comment at the Aug. 26 Twisp Town Council meeting featured multiple residents debating whether the council's action and proclamation could make the town a "Sanctuary City" or otherwise exceed its local remit.
Several speakers framed the issue as a threat to local order. Mark Edson said he owns two properties in Twisp and stated that he had sworn to uphold the constitutions; he told the council the situation "feels like a domestic threat." John Losinski, a longtime local business owner, said he worried about crime rates after Chief Budrow became sheriff and worried a sanctuary designation could complicate policing. Others, including Patty Yates and Amy McGuire, urged adherence to due process and described the resolution as consistent with neighbors looking out for one another.
Speakers on both sides asked the council to consider the limits of its authority. Jan Liu read the definition of a town council and urged members to confine actions to town business; Doug Irvine asked public documents to avoid implying majority support by preferring the phrase "some citizens" rather than language that suggests unanimity. The back-and-forth in public comment preceded the council vote to repeal Resolution #25-745 and adopt the revised proclamation.
