This Week’s in County Council
- Committee moves forward with legislation to limit county cooperation with federal immigration enforcement
- Public comment time cut in half as immigration debate draws crowds
Committee moves forward with legislation to limit county cooperation with federal immigration enforcement
Despite misgivings from almost half of its members, Allegheny County Council’s public safety committee voted in favor of moving forward with legislation to limit cooperation with federal immigration enforcement.
One sticking point at the March 2 committee meeting was redundancy given the county’s existing policies. “Just because a policy says one thing does not mean that it is set in stone for forever,” argued Bethany Hallam of Ross.
The sheriff, district attorney, executive’s office and county court provided the committee with assurance that they were upholding those policies. However, the public cannot access the content of those assurances, including a statement from the county executive. Council Member Suzanne Filiaggi of Franklin Park said, “We’re making decisions on information that you all don’t know,” acknowledging frustration of lack of transparency.
Residents at recent council meetings have said that uniformed county officers have been detaining immigrants and turning them over to ICE. A Feb. article in PublicSource also revealed a 2025 internal memo that the sheriff’s office had been assisting federal agents, though the office denied the allegation.
The three council members who voted against the legislation expressed disagreement with actions by federal agents, but differed on how council should respond.
Council Member Aaron Adams of Duquesne said legislating the matter could foment distrust among county employees. Filiaggi added that unwanted attention from the federal government could result in losing federal funding that goes toward initiatives such as housing support.
Moving forward, the legislation carries two amendments. One makes explicit that the legislation does not supersede directives from the president judge to county court employees. The second establishes that the purpose and intent behind the legislation is to create a boundary around county expenditures on federal operations.
The legislation goes to a full council vote as early as its March 10 meeting.
Public comment time cut in half as immigration debate draws crowds
Allegheny County Council only wanted to hear half of what residents had to say about county involvement with federal immigration enforcement.
Nine of the 15 members of council voted at the beginning of the Feb. 24 meeting to reduce public comment time from three minutes to one and a half.
Seventy people had registered in advance of the meeting. Nearly 100 signed up for the Feb. 10 meeting. Comments at both meetings were overwhelmingly in favor of the county not cooperating with federal immigration enforcement.
“It’s challenging to be impactful in a minute and a half,” said regular commenter Tanisha Long. “It seems council is prioritizing their time and doesn’t value public input.”
According to the council rules, council reserves the right to alter length of time for comment, the length of the comment period and to schedule overflow to another date. The public can submit written comments up to 24 hours after the meeting.
Participating in public comment requires effort, Long said. It costs money, either for public transit or parking, as well as time. “Some people spend hours researching, practicing and getting the timing right,” she said.
Council does not release a speaker order ahead of meetings. If people aren’t present when their name is called, they typically miss the opportunity to comment (they did get to at the Feb. 24 meeting).
Council has not announced if they will reduce comment time at the March 10 meeting.