|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
After legal review and public feedback, the Twisp Town Council is set to adopt a proclamation that affirms parts of the U.S. Constitution that some fear will be used to condone a sanctuary space in town.
The council needed to make revisions after the town attorney found portions of Resolution # 25-745, passed by the council May 13 with a vote of 3-0-2, problematic because it makes the mayor and town employees legally liable for interpreting the U.S. Constitution. The mayor has not asked for a motion to repeal the existing resolution and said the proclamation will likely replace the current resolution in a combined single vote at the next council meeting Aug. 26.
Mayor Hans Smith said the proclamation carries less legal weight but is a compromise between a segment of activists and townsfolk who object or do not want the town involved in national politics.
The proclamation would only apply to the Town of Twisp, not unincorporated Twisp. An audit of whether the signatories to Resolution #25-745 live within the town boundaries has not been completed, leading some to believe outside interests are swaying the council to take a political stand.
The revised proclamation states, in part,
The Town of Twisp affirms its commitment to lawfully preserve the constitutional rights of all people within its jurisdiction, including equal protection under the law, freedom of speech, religion, association and assembly, freedom from unreasonable search and seizure, and right to due process privacy. The Town of Twisp recognizes that illegal infringement of the constitutionally guaranteed rights and civil liberties of the people, under color of law, is an abuse of power, a breach of the public trust, a misappropriation of public resources, a violation of civil rights, and is beyond the scope of government authority.
Smith has been working with Kathleen Manseau on the language of the replacement proclamation. There will be another public hearing on Aug. 26 before the council votes.
The town council heard from five people on Tuesday, four of whom stated their opposition to the proclamation, calling it “redundant.”
“For the sake of precedent, I would vote against the proclamation, even though it has been brought down from the resolution,” said Kim Frey, who lives in unincorporated Twisp. “You guys have already made your pledge to the Constitution. You have already agreed to follow laws and rules, and I don’t know that this has anything more to offer, so it just feels redundant to me.”
Dennis Doyle, who lives within town limits, said he was offended that in the wording of the proclamation, he was lumped with other “town citizens” as supporters of the proclamation.
“You have the responsibility to reflect our interest, not your personal interest, our interest,” said Doyle. “You’ve already sworn an oath. I believe in your ability to carry forward with that oath. There’s no sense in you coming back and having to swear again that you’re going to support the Constitution of the United States.”
Lawrence Hooper, who lives on Balky Hill, questioned the role of special interests influencing the council.
“I don’t understand why certain people feel the need to try to compel the Twisp Town Council to take on political agendas which are distinctly not part of the council’s function or legally defined duties,” he said. “That these people may have some good ideas that are worthy of public consideration, but that they have chosen to attempt to coerce the town council to cater to their desires does not speak well for their motivation or their understanding.”
Mark Edson, who lives in the town of Twisp, asked the council to rescind the current resolution and reject the replacement proposition.
“This has a lot of fear in me right now, because are we going to open a sanctuary city here? Is that the intent of this? I know that there’s a lot of good people that are getting caught up in this immigration thing. For that, I’m truly sorry, but there’s a lot of people that should be transported out of here.”
Paula Mackrow asked to make a pubic comment after those who signed up had finished. She expressed concern about legal residents taken by ICE agents without due process.
“This has happened before, it can happen again, and it’s really up to us to stand firm, to know that the custodian at the school or the community center, that somebody in the town of Twisp will stand for this woman, her children, and any other legal resident of the United States.”
Smith said there is majority support on the council to replace the resolution with the proclamation and that it will most likely happen as a single vote, not two separate votes on rescinding the resolution and adopting the proclamation, which could potentially leave neither in place.
Manseau and newly appointed Councilmember Tim McGuire asked whether the town attorney’s separate conversations with Studen and Smith are public record. Smith says the conversations have been made public- namely that sections two and three of the original resolution create undue liability for the town in interpreting the U.S. Constitution. Smith said that as a councilmember, McGuire can now also access the town attorney.
Smith allowed Manseau to converse with the town council during their deliberations. Manseau said her group is not happy with the language, nor that the proclamation does not provide “teeth,” but that it is a compromise.
“We feel good about it as a compromise,” she said.
McGuire, Matsui, and Councilmember Will Menzies have voiced their support for the intent of the original resolution. Councilmembers Katrina Auburn and Wyatt Lundquist have expressed their reservations. The mayor would only vote to break a tie.
