Everett Mayor Cassie Franklin has issued a new directive outlining how city departments and police interact with federal immigration enforcement, according to reporting by MyNorthwest. The policy, announced during an April 2024 Everett City Council meeting and detailed in an official city news release, takes immediate effect and establishes limits on U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) access to non‑public city facilities while reaffirming compliance with state law.

In remarks documented in the city’s meeting recording, Franklin said that federal immigration enforcement activity had created “real fear for Everett residents,” citing concerns about racial profiling and community distrust. The directive bars ICE officers from entering non‑public areas of city buildings without a warrant, and Franklin stated that Everett police officers will not ask individuals about their immigration status. She also told councilmembers she expects officers to intervene when they witness federal officers using unnecessary force, “if it’s safe to do so.” The full meeting is available through the City of Everett’s YouTube channel.

According to a city news release, the directive establishes an Interdepartmental Response Team, requires departments to update internal policies, restricts federal enforcement access to city property, and sets documentation and record‑review protocols for the Everett Police Department. It also directs the city to build partnerships with community groups and local governments to support immigrant residents and businesses. City Attorney David Hall said in the release that the new rules go as far as the mayor can act “within the constraints of federal law.” According to reporting by Seattle Red, critics argued Franklin had yielded to anti‑ICE activists.

While Everett is far north of Cowlitz County, statewide policy decisions governing how local jurisdictions respond to federal immigration enforcement often influence expectations placed on cities throughout Washington. State law already prohibits local police agencies from participating in civil immigration enforcement, and cities that develop additional protocols can shape public understanding of what local authority does—and does not—control.

Why this matters for Southwest Washington

Local government in Washington regularly navigates the boundary between federal authority and municipal responsibilities, especially on issues affecting resident safety, trust in public institutions, and access to public services. Everett’s directive reflects an interpretation of state law that emphasizes limits on local participation in federal immigration enforcement and specifies how staff should respond when federal officers are present on city property.

For communities along the I‑5 corridor in Southwest Washington, similar questions can surface whenever federal agencies conduct operations near public buildings, interact with local law enforcement, or request access to records. Everett’s approach highlights how cities may attempt to formalize internal procedures, clarify staff responsibilities, or address community concerns without altering federal enforcement powers. These choices can influence how other municipalities consider aligning their own policies with state law.

Conclusion

The directive issued in Everett marks a detailed municipal response to ongoing statewide conversations about the role of local government in immigration enforcement. Though the policy applies only within Everett city limits, its framing and legal boundaries offer a reference point for other Washington communities evaluating how to maintain compliance with state law while managing interactions with federal agencies and protecting resident privacy.

Sources