A Denver-based nonprofit and a neighbor to the defunct prison set to become Colorado’s second immigration detention facility are suing the town of Hudson, alleging that town leadership is skirting local land use code in allowing the facility to reopen.

The Weld County resident, Janet Carlson, and the multi-faith organization Together Colorado filed the lawsuit in state court on Wednesday afternoon. It names the Town of Hudson, its town council, its planning commission and Planning Director Jennifer Woods as defendants.

Image

“(U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and The GEO Group) do not get to bully the Town of Hudson, the State of Colorado, or their residents into abandoning the rule of law,” the lawsuit says. “The facility is owned by a private real estate trust and would be operated by a private, for-profit contractor, and federal law does not preempt the application of Hudson’s generally applicable zoning and land-use requirements to private parties.”

Earlier this month, GEO — a private company that operates the existing Aurora immigration detention center — announced a five-year contract with the federal government to reopen the prison in Hudson as an immigration detention center. The approximately 1,200-bed facility is owned by Chicago-based Highlands Real Estate Investment Trust. It was a private prison for the Alaska Department of Corrections from 2009 until 2013 and has since been dormant.

The announcement came after Colorado activists had urged the prison's owner to reject the ICE facility proposal just weeks earlier.

The lawsuit states that the facility operated as an “adult medium security correctional facility” with a conditional use permit approved by voters in 2008. Hudson’s land use code does not list a correctional facility as an allowed use under the building’s zoning, so the facility required that conditional permit to legally operate. But that is now void after more than 12 years of vacancy, the lawsuit alleges.

Image

“The property at issue is not zoned for use as a detention facility. To develop and operate the facility lawfully, its private owner and operator must obtain a conditional use approval through the public processes set forth in Hudson’s own Code—just as the facility’s prior operator did in 2008,” the lawsuit says.

Hudson officials have claimed they do not have power over whether the site is reopened as an immigration detention center because it is superseded by federal contracts and authority. The lawsuit alleges, however, that because GEO and REIT are both private entities, the town’s land use code applies even if the people ultimately housed in the facility are subject to federal detention.

Carlson lives about one and a half miles from the proposed detention center and would be directly affected by its opening. She filed a complaint with Hudson over alleged violations of the land use code in May and requested a written interpretation of the code as it relates to reopening the facility, but never received a response. Carlson worries about the increased noise, traffic, light and security concerns if the detention center reopens — issues she suffered while it was previously open, according to the lawsuit.

“We understand that immigration enforcement policies are a topic of national debate, but the Town’s role is not to determine immigration enforcement,” Hudson Town Manager Bryce Lange wrote in an email. “However, the Town remains committed to focusing on its roles at the local level such as water, wastewater, streets, and public safety.”

The lawsuit is seeking the court to require Hudson to enforce its own land use code and declare that the previous conditional use permit no longer applies.

“The lawsuit with the Town of Hudson is about more than one town or one detention center,” Meghan Carrier, the executive director of Together Colorado, said in a statement. “It is about whether cities across Colorado will have the moral fortitude to resist intimidation by the Trump administration and hold firm to exercising their authority to protect our neighbors.”