Framingham Rules Subcommittee Meeting - April 22, 2026: Welcoming Ordinance and Council Rules Discussed
Framingham Rules Subcommittee Meeting - April 22, 2026: Welcoming Ordinance and Council Rules Discussed
The Framingham City Council Rules Subcommittee met on April 22, 2026, at 6:00 p.m. to continue discussions on the proposed welcoming ordinance (Trust Act), review council rules, and address other procedural items. The subcommittee heard updates from Deputy Chief Riley on the Flock camera contract and police policy, received public testimony from community advocates, and debated specific provisions of the Trust Act. A draft of recommended changes to the welcoming ordinance will be presented at the next meeting on May 18, 2026.
Public Comments & Testimony
- Diego Lowe (MetroWest Worker Center) raised concerns about the scope of coordination between Framingham Police and DHS, particularly regarding task force investigations. He requested documentation on the number and nature of investigations involving DHS collaboration to ensure they remain within the bounds of major criminal enterprises. He also noted that a reference to 8 USC 1326 (criminal re-entry) in the ordinance could be problematic.
- Aviva Schaefer (Attorney, MetroWest Legal Services) commented on the "notwithstanding" clause in the draft ordinance, suggesting that it appears more permissive than existing state law and case law (Lund decision). She recommended tightening the language to align with legal standards, such as adding "except as permitted by law."
Discussion Items
- Welcoming Ordinance / Trust Act: The subcommittee reviewed the draft Trust Act submitted by Councilor Ward. They noted that most provisions are already covered by the existing welcoming ordinance or the Lund decision. Focus turned to adding a reporting requirement for the police chief to provide annual statistics (e.g., number of immigration detainers, transfers to ICE, costs). Members agreed on the value of a twice-yearly or quarterly report including demographics and other breakdowns. They also discussed the "notwithstanding" clause (Section 2) which lists permissible activities; after debate, they decided to replace it with language limiting police actions to what is permitted by state and federal law, rather than affirmatively listing activities. Chair Stefanini will draft the revised ordinance for the next meeting.
- Council Rules: The subcommittee discussed standardizing document formats, naming conventions, and templates for reports (categorized as action, informational, or presentation). They also touched on protocols for proclamations/resolutions/citations, public records transparency (e.g., listing correspondence on agendas), and executive session procedures. Councilor Bryant noted that guidelines for proclamations already exist in the rules and no further changes may be needed. The subcommittee agreed to continue refining these items and will present proposals at the next meeting.
Key Outcomes
- Deputy Chief Riley Update: The Flock camera policy has been finalized; the contract is under review by the city solicitor. Deputy Riley expects to have a final answer within four weeks (by May 18).
- Minutes Approval: Minutes from December 15, 2025, January 12, 2026, and February 23, 2026 were approved. Councilor Bryant voted no on the February 23, 2026 minutes due to language she claimed inaccurately stated the charter "recommended" designating members as special employees when it only recommended investigation. The minutes passed 2-1.
- Next Meeting: Scheduled for Monday, May 18, 2026, at 6:00 p.m., where a draft of the revised welcoming ordinance will be presented for review and potential vote to send to the full council.
Note: The meeting date is given as April 22, 2026, per the system prompt. The transcript references the next meeting as May 18, which aligns with a four-week timeline.
Meeting Transcript
Good evening. Arriving at 6 p.m., the rules subcommittee will begin tonight's agenda. We have a continued discussion relative to the welcoming ordinance, and what to do relative to that, followed by a discussion of council rules, in particular looking at formatting of documents, resolutions, protocols to documents, executive sessions. And lastly, we have a discussion of the Home Rule Charter and the budget process. We have been pushing that discussion off. So with that, I would uh entertain a discussion and start the dialogue relative to the welcoming ordinance. Is there anyone that would like to speak? Either online or in person. Well, Mr. Chair. Yes. I guess I'll start the conversation. You know, I I think it was it was very interesting to listen to our last meeting, and I think it was a very good productive dialogue about what's going on in the community, talking about the flock cameras, um, and what is it that Framingham can do? And I've been thinking uh a lot about this, and I think a lot of others have as well. Um I still do have questions about non-police issues, such as, you know, if we have a plan here in the memorial building. Um, if I comes here or uh ways to protect more of our immigrant community through making sure that our data is secure. Um other plans that some uh other municipal buildings would have uh to protect folks. And I don't know if that's something that we want to pursue. Is that something that we would be an update in an ordinance? I I am thinking out loud here. Um about what those next steps would be. So I think uh we'll hear shortly from uh police with an update on the contract and policy, which I think would be helpful for us in bringing resolution to that. So I think we can pause that for a second. I also think that we looked at in our last meeting, we talked a little bit about what we did with the uh previous iteration of the welcoming ordinance and some of the suggestions that were made to the mayor. It would be worth revisiting that and updating that as well, I think, in terms of what best practices are we doing, what best practices are we not doing, that maybe we as a community should be looking to do. Um I think that would be helpful. I also think the update from RepSouza was very helpful on the Protect Act, and many of the things that we were thinking about and talking about, either covered by the Lunds case or uh by the Protect Act. One of the areas that is particularly curious that I think we should look at in terms of um suggesting is um schools. What do we do relative to a policy relative to access to schools and should we be looking at some sort of policy or collaboration with our schools on how we do that? So I think that would be helpful as well. Um we have um Deputy Chief Riley has joined us. Deputy, nice to see you. Good to see you. I apologize with the last couple of days. I totally forgot about this meeting. No worries. Given the fact you sat through two hours of a meeting for five-minute presentation last night. Um I'm sure you've you've uh absorbed all you have for meetings. Um, I I have an enormous appreciation for the stuff you guys do. Um the uh and you do it with a smile and with a level of dignity that the rest of us should all learn to do. Um we're trying to bring closure to this welcoming ordinance and report back to the council. Um that we just want to make sure we clear through is the final version of your policy and the final version of your contract. If you could just bring us up to speed in terms of where you are with that and when we'll have closure, because I don't want to go back to the council without having crisp answers to those two questions. And we are referencing the contract with Flock and the Flock policy. I just want to be correct. Correct. Yep. Yep. So the policy uh we finalized. I want to say a few weeks ago, it may have been right before that uh meeting we last had.
openpublica.com