Laserfiche WebLink
Councilmember Randle stated that fighting fire with fire worries him. <br />Councilmember Elnagdy clarified that it would be a moral show of force. <br />Councilmember Jenson stated that if a separation ordinance were implemented and asked how the <br />language would be worded to prohibit ICE from staging on City property, as he did not believe the <br />language shown would do that. <br />Councilmember Elnagdy stated that she could propose language, but it would need to be done with the <br />assistance of the City Attorney. She recognized that the Trump administration is challenging separation <br />ordinances, which is a risk, but commented that there are also risks related to the loss of life. <br />City Attorney Lindgren stated that one of the most legally defensible positions the City could take would <br />be to say that no assembly is allowed on City property except for specified events, such as birthday <br />parties. He stated that enforcement would be beyond his role. He stated that they would not specify <br />that ICE is not allowed, but that any assembly of officers would not be allowed in order to be neutral in <br />the statement. <br />Councilmember Randle asked what would happen if something happened and officers could not <br />respond on City property. City Attorney Lindgren stated that is why he separated it into two pieces, <br />because there would be challenges. He stated that he would think of assembly as a gathering rather <br />than enforcement actions to ensure that the police could still do their job. He stated that this would be <br />a neutral statement, and it would be the job of the Council to decide if it is good policy. <br />Mayor Webster asked if all parking lots for parks could be shut down to any community member for a <br />period of time. Mr. Lindgren replied that is correct. <br />Councilmember Jenson referenced the town hall meeting he participated in, and Roseville stated that <br />they would be going down the separation ordinance route, but believed that in order to make it <br />effective, they would need to make it so that no one could use the parking lot or park in order to not be <br />discriminatory against ICE. <br />Councilmember Elnagdy stated that the vast majority of questions from residents are related to the <br />Police and what their response can be. She recognized the statement from Councilmember Randle that <br />he would not want to put police officers in the position to confront ICE and suggested that they receive <br />input from the Police Chief on whether the department would have issues enforcing no assembly on City <br />grounds. <br />Police Chief Spiess replied that he would have a lot of hesitation with that. He explained that as a police <br />Department, regardless of what any other police department does, they cannot operate out of what the <br />moral thing to do is, as they swore an oath to uphold the laws, and residents appreciate that they follow <br />the law and do not have the authority to deviate from that. He was unsure of any city that has passed <br />an ordinance and charged its police to enforce that ordinance. He provided examples of lawful behavior <br />when it comes to interaction with Federal authority and immigration enforcement, as well as unlawful <br />behavior. He stated that if an ordinance is adopted, they place themselves in the position of having a <br />confrontation with ICE agents that could be seen as unlawful. He stated that he does not want to put <br />his officers in that position and would expect that the officers would have a lot of questions about being <br />asked to do that. He stated that there is a reason that local law enforcement is not enforcing the <br />ordinances that have been adopted by some communities.