Residents seek update to town policy in response to ICE

Some residents have asked the Town Board to update a 2017 policy that limits Philipstown's cooperation with federal immigration authorities.

The board approved the policy by a 3-2 vote during President Donald Trump's first administration. Two current members of the board, Supervisor John Van Tassel and Robert Flaherty, accounted for the "no" votes.

The resolution ensures "equal protection" for all residents, regardless of race, religion, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation and/or immigration status, and forbids town employees, unless required by state or federal law, from assisting in investigations of immigration or citizenship status or participating in arrests or detentions by federal immigration officers. Employees are also prohibited from requesting, maintaining or disclosing details of immigration status.

At a Town Board meeting on Feb. 5, Board Member Judy Farrell proposed amending the policy to specify that employees cannot "voluntarily disclose" identifying information about a resident without a judicial warrant or court order, and that Philipstown would notify anyone whose information is disclosed.

Another amendment would prohibit immigration officers from entering "non-public court spaces" or obtaining court calendars and records without a judicial warrant or court order.

Farrell said the new language was designed to protect personal data, not immigration status, which the town does not collect. "It's about requiring judicial process, which residents are entitled to under the Constitution, and to make sure our town staff aren't sharing residents' information," she said.

In January 2025, the state attorney general, Letitia James, issued guidance that noted federal law does not require a local government to communicate with immigration authorities, but that a federal statute says municipalities cannot prevent employees "from sending to, or receiving from" them information regarding someone's citizenship or immigration status. Nothing prevents governments from withholding other information, said James.

Van Tassel said he opposed the suggested changes. Without a police department and without jurisdiction over Philipstown's court, the measure "is not the town's responsibility" and "jeopardizes the stability and rights" of the town and its employees, he said.

"We have to follow the law; we can't follow sentiment or symbolism," said Van Tassel. He noted the 2017 policy has never had to be enforced.

One resident who spoke at the meeting, Dan Nobel, said: "What you're saying is, 'I can't foresee an issue where it's going to come up.' Great. You never have to deal with it," he said. "My point is, you don't know what's going to come up. These guys are nuts."

Water district levy

Philipstown is facing criticism from residents of the Garrison Landing Water District after it imposed a $2,500 levy on each of 20 parcels.

At the Town Board's Feb. 5 meeting, property owners questioned whether they had received proper notice about the levy and if it was applied fairly.

The town is collecting the annual tax to repay $500,000 it borrowed to cover district-related expenses. Those expenses included buying water when the district's well failed, fixing leaks and drilling and connecting a new well. The town plans to install water meters, which were last used there in the early 2000s, said Van Tassel.

Of the six parcels owned by Garrison Station Plaza, three do not have water service, and one is "mostly submerged" in the Hudson River, said Del Karlen, the organization's president. "It's time to go back to the drawing board — do it right, do it fairly," he said.

A state audit released in May 2025 calculated that Philipstown spent $2.4 million between 2018 and 2023 on the water district, shrinking the town's general-fund balance from $1 million to $53,137. Annual expenses for the district rose from $85,000 to $975,000 during the same period.

Philipstown also discovered that it had mist...