ALAMOSA — Members of Alamosa City Council found themselves in a difficult position during Wednesday night’s meeting. An innocuous building in Alamosa has been occupied by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) for more than 20 years, but most citizens had no idea until it was reported that the facility had “hold rooms” to hold detainees for up to 72 hours prior to transfer. .

With ICE detention already making headlines across the country, the news grabbed local attention when it was learned a facility was literally in their back yard.

In response to the local media coverage, city staff checked into the zoning status where the building was located and found they have been out of compliance for years. Changes in 2017 made the non-compliance even more evident..

Council had to take up the issue of how to proceed, knowing that they could address the zoning violations but had no oversight of any kind about what agency practices went on inside.

Council had 3 alternatives for future action.

Option 1 - enforce the code and direct staff to work with ICE and the landlord to terminate the unlawful use.

Option 2 - direct staff to work with ICE to determine whether there is any way to make the property meet the conditions necessary for approval of the conditional use (this seems unlikely, given the requirement that the facility be on 5 acres of land).

Or option 3 - recognize that the use has gone on for over 20 years without apparent adverse effect upon the community, and direct staff to work with ICE to ensure that the use may not be modified or expanded in the future.

Option 3 would also recognize that ICE has defenses to any enforcement action..

With chambers being more than three quarters full, a line of individuals took the podium and addressed council members, stating the treatment of individuals inside the facility was “inhumane”, “cruel”, "contrary to values" and "something that should not be tolerated".

Stories were shared about specific individuals, asylum seekers here legally that had been taken into custody.

The solution suggested over and over was to make it a goal to remove any presence of the agency from Alamosa, citing the detention practices as not good for the community.

Attendees on Zoom agreed. With more than 20 people sitting in, a few chose to speak up, including State Rep. Matt Martinez, who said, “I agree with those in opposition to the facility there. I don’t think it’s a good look for our community and the valley. And I just spoke with the council members that oppose its presence about the options available to them”.

A spokesman for CD-3 candidate Alex Kelloff read the following statement. “I urge the council to explore all possible avenues to phase out ICE detention facilities and test solutions that are more compassionate, transparent and align with our community’s values. Let’s use all means necessary and resources available to shut down ICE detention facilities.”

At the end of the comment section, councilors clearly struggled with the decision at hand. Each council member prefaced their statement by saying, paraphrased, “I don’t support what ICE is doing. I think the treatment is inhumane and believe it should be stopped.”

As a result, the conversation repeatedly veered in the direction of trying to assert some kind of control over the detention practices.

But members were, time and again, brought back to what they had control of, what they had no control over and what decision they needed to make.

“The city’s role is limited to zoning,” said City Manager Heather Sanchez, “not oversight of actions taken within the building.”

Eventually, after Councilors Jan Vigil and Michael Carson stated their intentions to diplomatically approach local ICE officials to see what could be observed and learned first hand, a motion was introduced to adopt resolution #3.

The resolution states that the city will not take action  requiring ICE to meet zoning requirements or vacate as the agency has occupied the property for 20 plus years with no incident. But a commitment was stated - although not included in the resolution - to monitor the facility to make sure there are no expansions of additional hold rooms.

The motion passed unanimously.