| |
Vote: 6 - 0 |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 13. |
|
|
|
DISCUSSION ITEMS |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
A. |
|
|
Discussion about City protocols for interacting with Federal agencies |
| |
City Manager Joanne Keene begins by sharing that the city has been working on immigration-related concerns since the previous year. During that time, the police chief has met with community and immigrant groups to understand their concerns, while city leadership and a stakeholder group reviewed the city’s immigration directive. The police department also created an incident action plan outlining how the city would respond if immigration enforcement actions occurred in the community; this plan was adopted in July 2025.
She acknowledges that the proposal may not satisfy everyone, some may think it does not go far enough, while others may think it goes too far, but she believes the approach is one the city can support and implement immediately. She also noted that the city has coordinated with neighboring cities, including Tucson and Phoenix, and their approaches are largely aligned.
Ms. Keene emphasized the city’s strong relationship with federal partners, noting that federal agencies support many aspects of the community, from wildfire response and disaster assistance to major infrastructure projects. The city has received tens of millions of dollars in federal funding in recent fiscal years, and large projects like the Rio de Flag flood control project exceed $200 million.
Ms. Keene, Assistant City Manager Shannon Anderson, and Interim Deputy City Manager Kevin Fincel provided a PowerPoint presentation that covered the following:
PROTOCOLS FOR INTERACTIONS WITH FEDERAL AGENCIES
ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION TODAY
CITY’S ROLE IN IMMIGRATION ENFORCEMENT
REPORTING ISSUES OF CONCERN
PROTOCOLS FOR INTERACTIONS WITH FEDERAL AGENCIES
PARTNER ENTITY USE OF CITY PROPERTY
CLARIFYING PROCESS FOR PARTNER ENTITY REQUESTS
SHARING GUIDANCE WITH PARTNERS AND COMMUNITY
Councilmember Aslan begins by thanking staff for the significant work and energy that went into preparing the directive and responding to community concerns. He asks Ms. Keene to explain what a City Manager directive is, how it differs from a Council policy, where these directives are published, and how durable they are if future leadership changes. Ms. Keene explains that directives are administrative rules issued by the City Manager rather than policies approved by the Council. They are posted on the city website and typically guide internal operations and employee practices. She gives examples such as directives on remote work, threat management, service animals in city facilities, vacation leave, and employee ethics. While acknowledging that a future City Manager could technically change a directive, she states that she intends to keep existing directives in place and would inform Council if changes were considered.
Councilmember Garcia thanks staff for listening to the Council and the community throughout the process and recognizing the significant behind-the-scenes work that has been done over the past year. He notes that some community members felt they did not have enough time to review the directive because it is being implemented quickly through an administrative action. He asks how the city plans to continue community engagement and whether feedback could lead to future improvements. Ms. Keene stated that community meetings are being organized, including sessions at the Murdoch Center and with various neighborhood groups, and she emphasizes that she is open to strengthening the directive if suggestions remain consistent with state and federal law.
Councilmember House raises concerns she has heard from residents about public safety and the potential impacts of federal immigration enforcement within the community. She asks whether the directive adequately addresses those concerns. Ms. Keene points to the Police Department’s Incident Management Plan adopted the previous July, explaining that it outlines how the city would respond if immigration enforcement activity occurred in the community.
Councilmember Matthews expresses appreciation for the staff’s work and for the effort to craft a solution that complies with state and federal law. She believes that implementing the directive administratively may actually be beneficial because it allows the city to adjust quickly if real situations arise that were not anticipated. She also emphasizes the importance of maintaining functional relationships with federal agencies, noting that the city relies on federal partners during emergencies such as fires, floods, and disasters.
Vice Mayor Sweet also thanks the team and suggests creating a public information sheet or packet to distribute at community meetings. She explains that such materials could introduce Councilmembers, explain how residents can contact them, and summarize the directive so community members feel heard and informed. Ms. Keene indicates that staff will work on producing materials and linking residents to online resources.
Mayor Daggett voiced her support for implementing the directive quickly but also would like it codified through an ordinance after further public outreach. She asks whether other Arizona cities are taking similar approaches. City Attorney Solomon shared that the city’s approach is largely aligned with those of Phoenix and Tucson, noting that Tucson is considering a similar administrative directive at its council meeting that same evening.
Council consensus was supportive of implementing the directive while continuing community outreach and leaving open the possibility of strengthening or formally codifying it in the future.
Ace Overman provided public comment in support of the City Manager directive. He emphasized that federal immigration enforcement actions across the country have caused fear and anxiety, leading people to avoid public spaces like City Hall, libraries, parks, and courthouses. He stressed that Flagstaff residents want to feel safe accessing city services without intimidation. He noted that other communities have addressed this by posting signage on city property stating that civil immigration enforcement is prohibited without valid judicial warrants, citing examples from Rhode Island and New Mexico. He feels that such signage provides clarity, reassurance, and a sense of security, encouraging civic participation and well-being. He requested that Council consider adding similar signs under the City Manager directive to ensure all Flagstaff residents feel safe and able to fully participate in the community.
Kira Russo submitted a written comment with questions about election security. and Sharlee (Li) Carrole Lin submitted written comments encouraging a stronger directive.
Ms. Keene clarified that the City Manager directive applies city facilities, but the City Court operates under a separate administrative order managed by the Administrative Office of the Courts, so different guidance applies there. |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 14. |
|
|
|
FUTURE AGENDA ITEM REQUESTS
After discussion and upon agreement by three members of the Council, an item will be moved to a regularly-scheduled Council meeting. |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
A. |
|
|
Future Agenda Item Request (F.A.I.R.): A Citizen Petition titled "Prohibit ICE from operating on City owned property." |
| |
Phil Goldblatt addressed Council in opposition to the two petitions. He stated that cooperation between city, state, and federal authorities has long existed for public safety, and that the petitions would be largely symbolic with little practical effect. He noted that ICE typically operates independently, that the petitions would not prevent violations of city, state, or federal law, and that any concerns about ICE abuse should be addressed by enforcing existing laws or passing ordinances that fill actual gaps. He urged the Council to avoid spending time on what he sees as politically motivated actions.
The following individuals addressed the Council in support of the petition:
- Kim Curtis
- Frederica Hall
- Daniel Davis
- Crystal Diaz
- Brent Simmons
- Maria Villasenor
- Sarah Regala
- Claire Wagoner
- Jill Stephenson
- Kyle Nelson
- Peggy Sheldon-Scurlock
- Alec (Ace) Overmann
- James Cosby
- Rhiannon Colvin
The following comments were received:
- Move the citizen petition forward as a future agenda item.
- Hundreds of residents have signed the petition, showing strong public support.
- The public wants debate and discussion on this issue.
- Other cities and counties have taken similar actions, including Providence, Minneapolis, Pima County, and Tucson.
- Flagstaff residents should feel safe accessing public spaces like libraries, parks, and city offices.
- Fear caused by ICE and federal immigration enforcement is preventing people from using public services.
- Posting signs on city property stating ICE cannot operate without a judicial warrant would reduce fear.
- Signs are both symbolic and practical for reassuring residents.
- Existing city protocols and directives are not enough; they can be changed or rescinded.
- An ordinance would provide long-term protections that cannot be easily removed.
- ICE has acted outside the law in many cases across the country.
- Immigrant and Indigenous communities are particularly vulnerable to enforcement actions.
- Many people affected by ICE have no criminal record.
- The petition and ordinance would clarify standards for how federal agents can interact with city property.
- Protecting residents’ mental health is as important as physical safety.
- The city has the authority to regulate how public property is used.
- Community members want clear, consistent rules for ICE interactions.
- Local ordinances can create a legal pathway to hold federal agencies accountable if laws are violated.
- Public signage and communication show that the city supports safety and inclusion.
- Proactive measures, like “know your rights” training, are important for community preparedness.
- Residents and students need clear protocols in case federal enforcement comes to city property.
- The ordinance supports trust between residents and city services.
- The measure aligns with the city’s mission to protect and enhance quality of life for all.
- Historical civil rights examples show the importance of proactive protection policies.
- Even if enforcement is federal, local measures can prevent intimidation and fear in public spaces.
- An ordinance would give stability regardless of future changes in federal administration.
- Public discussion and debate are necessary to ensure proper consideration of these issues.
- Council action would affirm Flagstaff as a welcoming and inclusive community.
- The measure is a preventive step to act before harm occurs, not just a reaction afterward.
- Some commenters asked about city responsibilities if someone is injured during enforcement actions.
- Passing the petition and ordinance could help the community feel safer and more engaged.
- Protecting immigrant neighbors is a priority for community cohesion.
- Federal enforcement actions are seen as violating civil rights and creating fear.
- The ordinance is intended to establish safety, trust, and clarity in public spaces.
- The city should act morally, not just legally.
The following individuals submitted written comments in support of the petition:
- Carson Redmon
- Bonnie Feather
- Dave Fronske
- Kevin White
- Keara Hudler
- Amy Perry
- David Prieb
- Alice Bauman
- Margie Goulden
- Mare Schumacher
- Catherine Thebert
- Emma Nesteruck
- Maria Castillo-Rincon
- Mare Schumacher
Steven and Joan Harris submitted a written comment in opposition to the petition.
Councilmember House thanked the community and city leadership for engaging in the discussion. She believes that federal law and morality do not always align, citing historical examples like the Fugitive Slave Act and Japanese internment, and stressed the importance of examining the city’s role in immigration enforcement while protecting trust and community well-being. She supported moving forward with discussion on agenda Item 14A but did not support Item 14B, viewing it as a question rather than an actionable item, and advocated for clarity, transparency, and policies that balance legal requirements with community safety.
Ms. Keene offered clarifications on some of the public comments. She noted that SB1070 does not allow the city to ban ICE from facilities, that Pima County’s ordinance would likely face legal challenges, and that Tucson is handling the issue through a City Manager directive rather than an ordinance.
Councilmember Spence voiced his support for moving the petition forward to a formal agenda to allow citizen voices to be heard and to explore ways to keep the community safe and healthy.
Councilmember Matthews thanked staff and the community for the conversation but cautioned against passing any ordinance that would violate state or federal law, warning about potential danger to law enforcement and residents. She emphasized that disagreements with laws should be addressed through lobbying or legal change, not through actions that could put people at risk.
Councilmember Aslan acknowledged the efforts of petition organizers but noted that a literal ban on ICE would be legally untenable under Arizona law. He supported the city staff’s proposed plan as a strong, enforceable alternative, and recommended drafting an ordinance based on the City Manager’s directive, clarifying the city court processes, and supporting signage to enhance public safety.
Vice Mayor Sweet highlighted the importance of community input and city leadership responsiveness, stressing the need to operate within the law and protect both employees and residents. She supported the City Manager’s directive and requested that information be shared in English and Spanish, proactive outreach be conducted to community groups and neighborhood associations, and smaller community meetings be held to foster dialogue.
Councilmember Garcia expressed gratitude to the community for protecting due process and human dignity. He acknowledged the region’s Indigenous, Hispanic, Basque, and multicultural heritage and highlighted the importance of Flagstaff’s diversity. He emphasized that local law enforcement is effectively keeping the community safe, that there is no major immigration issue in Flagstaff, and that the city should work respectfully with federal agencies. He supported the City Manager’s directive over the petition.
Mayor Daggett acknowledged the need to comply with SB1070 while protecting civil rights and outlined steps already taken, including revising and reinforcing police administrative orders, incorporating community feedback, and completing staff training. She proposed continuing the discussion through the City Manager’s directive, a subsequent ordinance to codify the directive, clarifying city court processes, implementing safety signage, providing bilingual information packets, holding community group meetings, and reviewing law enforcement mask policies.
There was not requisite support to advance the item to a future agenda for discussion. |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
B. |
|
|
Future Agenda Item Request (F.A.I.R.): A Citizen Petition titled "Clarification on the Flagstaff Police Department January 24th Statement." |
| |
The following individuals addressed Council in support of the petition:
- Blake Scott
- Samuel Butler
The following comments were received:
- Urge the Council to advance both petitions to protect neighbors and the community from ICE actions.
- The city needs to prevent violence and discourage ICE enforcement within the city.
- Use city resources, including legal counsel and tax dollars, to defend the community and challenge harmful federal actions.
- This is an opportunity to continue important protective work without limiting the city’s authority.
- Law enforcement has discretion in cooperating with ICE and can take actions to protect community members.
- Recognize the powers the Police Department has to safeguard residents.
- This issue cannot be ignored and will eventually impact the community, calling for moral and principled leadership in addressing it.
Kevin White submitted a written comment in support of the petition.
There was not requisite support to advance the item to a future agenda for discussion.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 15. |
|
|
|
OPEN CALL TO THE PUBLIC |
| |
None |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 16. |
|
|
|
INFORMATIONAL ITEMS TO/FROM MAYOR, COUNCIL, AND STAFF, AND FUTURE AGENDA ITEM REQUESTS |
| |
Councilmember Garcia asked for an update on the plan for the Joel Montalvo baseball field that is not being used. |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 17. |
|
|
|
ADJOURNMENT |
| |
The Regular Meeting of the Flagstaff City Council held March 3, 2026, adjourned at 6:35 p.m. |
