Town of Silt passes non-sanctuary resolution in response to recent immigration boom
Glenwood Springs Post Independent
Andrea Teres-Martinez/Glenwood Springs Post Independent
Following in the footsteps of the Garfield County Commissioners, the Town of Silt Board of Trustees passed a resolution declaring Silt as a non-sanctuary community during Monday’s regular meeting.
The resolution was adopted unanimously, before which several board members expressed their concerns with what they’ve seen happening in Carbondale in recent months.
“To me, this isn’t a political, a philosophical, or a moral question. It’s a resource question,” Mayor Pro Tem Derek Hanrahan said. “We saw what another community, Carbondale, had to do due to an unexpected arrival … They were able to pull it off for three months, and they will likely be feeling the repercussions of that fiscally, as well as operationally for the balance of the year.”
The resolution lists several arguments for the non-sanctuary designation, including but not limited to:
- Municipalities with sanctuary city designations “have seen significant increases to their budgets and costs to the public” and now “face an accelerated budget shortfall and agency budget cuts to fund migrant services.”
- Healthcare and education services in sanctuary cities have faced a significant increase in demand, costing millions of dollars.
- The Town of Silt doesn’t have the financial resources nor “the physical and operational infrastructure to address the human needs an influx of migrants, whether legal or illegal, would place on the community.”
“Now, therefore, be it resolved that the Town of Silt Colorado declares that the town is not a sanctuary community and will not directly open shelters or provide services, other than emergency services, to migrants and/or undocumented immigrants that may arrive in the town,” the resolution states.
Trustees weigh in on immigration concerns
The board members’ comments further reflected the points listed in the document itself, which Hanrahan first brought to the board for discussion.
“Silt doesn’t have the resources that Carbondale has to deal with that,” he said. “And I don’t know what we would do if that were to happen.”
Silt had not previously identified itself as a sanctuary community, though he argued that the absence of an explicit “no” could be misinterpreted as an implicit “yes,” which is why he said the resolution was necessary to clear up any future misunderstandings.
“Carbondale did not have a yes or a no, and it was interpreted by that group as being an implicit yes,” Hanrahan said. “It’s not a judgment, It’s just an observation.”
He said another point that pushed him to bring the idea of a resolution to the board is the challenge of helping those who are already legal residents of the town of Silt, adding that he doesn’t think it would be right to ask the citizenry of Silt to support a potentially large number of people who may show up.
“If someone is a citizen of this town and they don’t pay their water bill for a certain number of months, we turn it off,” he said. “How do we justify giving away that same resource for free to someone who isn’t a citizen of the town of Silt? … I’m not saying I’m right. I’m simply saying I don’t know how to reconcile that disparity.”
The resolution also includes provisions, such as laws on public camping, taken from the town’s code, which Interim Town Administrator Jim Mann said are meant to “put on notice” that the town will continue to enforce them. The board added that there will be future discussion about further tightening camping ordinances.
Hanrahan emphasized the need for “comprehensive nationwide immigration reform,” stating that the responsibility of managing the recent influx of immigrants shouldn’t fall on individual municipalities with limited resources.
“It can’t be a patchwork of individual communities making these decisions,” he said. “It’s hard for us as elected officials, it’s hard for the police force, fire, and emergency services and utilities, it’s hard on the citizenry, and it’s hard on anybody who shows up. It doesn’t work for anybody.”
He added that the way other towns have willingly taken on the political and financial burden of supporting undocumented immigrants could result in more harm than good for the nation’s immigration response.
“I just don’t know how we act as a substitute for that larger change that needs to happen, and I think the more communities that do it potentially risk delaying the comprehensive reform that needs to happen at a national level,” he said. “And in effect, we become enablers. That’s a larger concern I have.”
Implications of the resolution
Attorney Mike Sawyer explained that the concept of the resolution mainly revolves around “whether a community’s police department coordinates with ICE (U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement) and is willing to provide notices to them about people who are incarcerated.” This includes enabling police officers to hold detainees over an allotted period of time until authorities can arrive and pursue legal action, an allowance that Garfield County Commissioners also discussed and encouraged when they passed their own resolution in March.
Two Silt residents gave in-person comments during the meeting, saying they were grateful the board had brought forth the resolution without Silt residents having to ask for it. Another two delivered comments to the trustees via email; one was in favor of the resolution, and the other expressed they felt it was a waste of the board’s time.
“This board has always put our citizens first … with all the decisions we’ve made on other big topics. And this is a decision to put our citizens first,” Trustee Sam Flores said. “We’re not gonna give you free water, we’re not gonna give you free food. You’re going to earn it, you’re gonna pay your bills, you’re gonna pay your rent, and that’s the way it should be … You should earn your way and join the community legally and become a citizen here in our town.”
