Spokane Council limits ICE actions on public property, bans private leases for detention facilities

Federal immigration agents are banned from performing enforcement actions on most public property without a judicial warrant anywhere in Spokane city limits, and also can’t lease land for detention facilities after back-to-back votes from the City Council on Monday.

Both actions were approved with a 6-1 vote, with Councilman Michael Cathcart as the sole “no” vote.

Immigration officers already need a warrant to enter a permitted event on most public property in Spokane, as long as organizers request protection and go through the proper steps to receive it, under rules the City Council created last summer.

The city’s new “Immigration Enforcement Free Zones,” introduced by Councilman Paul Dillon, would ban the use of any city-owned or -controlled property – such as parking lots, vacant lots, garages and other buildings – for immigration enforcement operations. This includes using the property for staging, surveillance, processing, interviewing or temporarily detaining people for civil immigration enforcement, among other prohibited activities.

This ban would not prevent agents from serving a valid judicial warrant, and it does not apply to open spaces such as parks, which are regulated by the city’s independent Parks Board.

The law also requires the city to post signs around its properties stating in both English and Spanish that: “This property is owned and controlled by the City of Spokane. It may not be used for civil immigration enforcement, including use as a staging area, processing area, or operations base.”

Private property owners are also now banned from leasing buildings for detention facilities under a law Mayor Lisa Brown proposed in February. The ban will apply to any detention facility regardless of operator, though it is aimed squarely at federal immigration officials.

“Local governments have limited tools, but these are tools to emphasize that we don’t want detention facilities in our neighborhoods and we do want federal agents to have accountability and boundaries on their actions,” Brown said in a Friday interview.

The move comes amid a major expansion of immigration enforcement facilities nationwide, including potential office space in Spokane for up to 70 people. A recent WIRED article examining the growing footprint of federal immigration agencies suggests the office would be used for “legal operations.”

Immigration and Customs Enforcement does not operate a detention facility in Spokane, but ICE does run a headquarters out of the Broadview Dairy building at 411 W. Cataldo Ave., which was the site of a major protest in June following the detention of Cesar Alvarez Perez and Joswar Slater Rodriguez Torres. Rodriguez Torres was released seven months later after a federal judge ruled in January that his detention was illegal; Alvarez Perez chose to self-deport rather than remain in custody.

The federal government is reexamining its lease for its Tacoma detention facility due to a need for additional space, though there is no immediate indication that ICE is eyeing Spokane for a detention facility.

Tukwila, another Washington city where ICE appears to be considering expanding its office space, also approved a similar ban on detention facilities on Feb. 24.

Ahead of the votes, Councilwomen Kitty Klitzke and Kate Telis both compared the federal government’s mass deportation campaign to Nazi Germany rounding up Jews and others .

“I have been wondering how I would have responded during the Holocaust,” Telis said. “My husband’s grandparents both lost everybody in concentration camps, and I think it’s important for all of us to stand up and say what’s right.”

Councilman Michael Cathcart argued the city had the right to deny the federal government access to public property but would not be able to enforce that right.

“If we start gating off all our properties and things like that, yes, we can control access to those properties, but if it’s open broadly to the public, there really is not much that our police force can do to enforce,” he argued.

Cathcart also believed the “Immigration Enforcement Free Zone” functionally already existed in state law and argued that citywide prohibitions of detention facilities could violate the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution.

Klitzke argued that it was good policy for the city to regulate the creation of detention facilities in the city, regardless of their operator.

“Detention facilities have huge impacts on wherever they’re sited; they need a lot of sewer infrastructure, transportation infrastructure, they use a lot of energy, and they’re very controversial for whatever neighborhood they’re plopped in,” Klitzke said.

The detention facility ban will automatically sunset after one year, though Brown anticipates working into the city’s permanent building code during upcoming changes to its Comprehensive Plan.