LANSING, Mich. (Michigan News Source) – As Donald J. Trump’s second presidency looms, Livingston County has already has already started tracking interactions with illegal immigrants. Meanwhile, Ingham County has gone in a different direction and is doubling down on its “welcoming” community status. The move reinforces its commitment to being a haven for immigrants, both legal and undocumented, even as political winds shift and immigration policy crackdowns are promised by President-elect Trump and his soon-to-be Border Czar, Tom Homan.

Ingham County proclaims commitment to immigrants.

Ingham County isn’t classified as a “sanctuary” county by the Center for Immigration Studies, which monitors areas that decline to cooperate with ICE; however, Ingham County commissioners have made it clear with Resolution #24-613 that they are not turning their backs on people who are “in need” and they “denounce those who have played into fear tactics and attempted to close the door to immigrants who come here searching for a better life.” The resolution, which passed last month, reiterates that “Ingham County has been and will continue to be a safe and welcoming place for those who choose to resettle here.”

MORE NEWS: MSU, UM Top 20 Teams in Newest AP Poll

The resolution also says that the Board “opposes any effort by those who discriminate against persons based on their country of origin, immigration status, or religion or to mischaracterize foreign- born persons as public safety threats”

Under an older resolution, the county says they are endeavoring to “create an atmosphere where immigrants and refugees have increased opportunities to integrate into the social fabric of their adopted hometowns” and “we encourage all newcomers to make Ingham County their home.”

The county sent out a letter with their new resolution to all of the state’s 82 other counties. Livingston County commissioners responded by unanimously rejecting their letter at a January meeting.

Why reaffirm their position?

This new resolution voted on and passed by Ingham County is the result of a November 2024 meeting in which the commissioners discussed a resolution condemning Livingston County’s decision to track interactions with illegal immigrants. Ingham County commissioners met on November 14th and on their agenda was the “Resolution Opposing Livingston County’s Resolution to Monitor and Document Contacts between Undocumented Noncitizens and the Livingston County Sheriff’s Office.”

In the minutes it says, “Commissioner Schafer stated she did not think this resolution would be productive, that Ingham County had to do the business of Ingham County, and they should be calling folks in Livingston County them instead of sending resolutions back and forth. Commissioner Schafer further stated that they needed to talk with neighboring counties and she was not in support of the Ingham County resolution.”

The minutes went on to say, “Commissioner Trubac further stated they were proud of Ingham County’s overall appearance and stance of being a welcoming county and not demonizing those that were already marginalized and vulnerable, and felt the work done in Ingham County was a sufficient demonstration of that.”

MORE NEWS: Butter Luck Next Time: Truck Carrying 42K Pounds of Margarine Catches Fire

Commissioner Trubac emphasized that he was hesitant to engage in a prolonged exchange with another county, considering it potentially unproductive and time-consuming.

During their discussions, most commissioners expressed disagreement with Livingston County’s actions. However, they chose not to pursue a resolution against Livingston County. Instead, they decided to take a positive approach by reaffirming their county’s previous “welcoming” resolutions. Controller Gregg Todd reminded them that the county had already passed several resolutions in the past reaffirming its values, suggesting they could do so again. Ultimately, the commissioners agreed to table the resolution opposing Livingston County until the December Law & Courts Committee meeting, where the newest resolution was introduced.

Who’s footing the bill on being “welcoming” or a “sanctuary”?

Positioning a city as a “welcoming” or a sanctuary city might sound inclusive and heartwarming in press releases, but critics argue there’s a less rosy reality behind these policies. Beyond the potential financial burden placed on local taxpayers – who could face even higher costs for illegal immigration if federal funding is cut under a Trump administration – there are concerns about public safety. With over 600,000 illegal immigrants with criminal records reportedly at large nationwide, critics caution that these policies could lead to rising crime rates. They warn that residents might not only shoulder the financial strain but also deal with the far-reaching consequences of such decisions.