Glenwood Springs City Council votes to pursue legal action against ICE facility landlord
share
GLENWOOD SPRINGS, Colo. — The Glenwood Springs City Council voted 6-1 Thursday night to pursue legal action against the owner of a facility operated by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement for land use code violations.
The vote came after months of pressure and investigation from community members into ICE operations at an unmarked office located at 100 Midland Ave. The motion will allow the city attorney Karl Hanlon to file a lawsuit in state court, on his recommendation, against the facility’s owner, JG Housing Solutions, LLC, a Florida-based company.
The lawsuit will argue that ICE has continued operating the facility as a detention facility, despite the revocation of its permit to do so.
“Somebody is operating a facility in violation of our code, are we going to do anything about it?” Hanlon said.
The vote marks the first step by the city to enforce an April decision made by its Planning and Zoning Commission, a volunteer board, which revoked the facility’s special use permit that allowed the tenants to detain individuals for up to 12 hours. ICE has operated out of the discreet unit, housed in a strip mall on the west side of town, for more than 20 years on a permit issued in 2003.
A monthslong investigative effort by the community revealed that ICE had violated the terms of the permit by holding detainees for longer than 12 hours on several occasions. The Department of Homeland Security denied such violations in a statement to the Colorado Sun, despite records obtained by the Deportation Data Project that confirmed the extended detainments.
Ultimately, the council’s Thursday vote answered a simple question on whether it would enforce its own code.
After the revocation of its special use permit in April, ICE and the landlord had the opportunity to appeal the decision within a week. Neither party protested or responded to inquiries from the town about its operations.
“The special use permit has already been revoked by the Planning Commission, and they didn't appeal that. So it's simply not permitted now,” Hanlon said.
After initial skepticism about the city’s ability to win an injunction, a recent incident gave Hanlon and the council members increased confidence about the merits of a potential lawsuit.
On July 24, EMS responded to a call at the facility, where the emergency responders witnessed and confirmed that the facility was being used for detainment. To Hanlon and the council, that amounted to firmer evidence of zoning code violations.
“We had to wait until we had something that was tangible and actionable and defensible. And so it felt like we were not listening,” Mayor Pro Tem Erin Zalinski said. “What felt like negligence was just trying to be purposeful.”
The city will now seek an injunction from a court stating that the landlord and anybody they lease to is not allowed to engage in the use of the building for detention.
Though Hanlon believes the city has a case, he still considers them to be underdogs in “a little bit of uncharted territory,” estimating their chances of success to be less than 25%.
At issue is the well-established interpretation of the federal government’s legal supremacy over local governments and their laws. A similar legal argument is underway in Portland, Oregon.
Hanlon’s recommendation to pursue action solely against the property owner in state court, rather than the federal agencies themselves, may give the city a higher chance of success and a path to avoid arguing against the federal government’s supremacy.
Were the city to win an injunction, the question of what happens next looms over the facility.
ICE could simply ignore the injunction, and some council members wondered whether their vote would provoke an aggressive response by federal agents in Glenwood Springs.
“Because we're getting rid of one problem doesn't mean we need to invoke another,” Mayor Marco Dehm said. “If the buses show up with ICE agents, well, then we made the wrong decision. But I hope that's not the case.”
Council member Steve Smith wondered if litigation was more effective than attempting to negotiate with ICE.
“If they're going to end up ignoring whatever happens…by pursuing court action, have we lost an opportunity to negotiate better conditions for people who are held there?” Smith said.
Hanlon responded, “I have not found ICE to be particularly cooperative on negotiating better conditions for anybody.”
Community members in attendance reacted with applause and smiles after the council approved the motion.
Before the vote, many residents said they wanted the council to vote on principles and the law, and not the potential responses from the federal government.
Ellen Friedman doesn’t live in Glenwood Springs but has worked in the area for decades.
“We understand this is a difficult decision for many of you,” Friedman said. “We're here to support you, to encourage you to be brave.”
One resident of Carbondale said that laws “apply to everyone or no one,” and another said that “It's not the city council's responsibility to solve the logistical problems that ICE created for themselves by losing their special use permit, by repeatedly failing to comply with the law.”
Glenwood Springs resident Ashley Stahl said that the vote was a simple one about code violations, and that it was time to join the community in taking a stand.
“There's no front line somewhere else,” Stahl said. “If little old Glenwood Springs can do this, anybody can.”
Type of story: News
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. To read more about why you can trust the journalism of Rocky Mountain PBS, please visit our editorial standards and practices page.
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. To read more about why you can trust the journalism of Rocky Mountain PBS, please visit our editorial standards and practices page.