Local Leaders Hold the Line After LaLota Threatens To Cut Off Future Federal Funding in East Hampton Over ICE Law
- Jack Motz
- Jun 23
- 5 min read
U.S. Representative Nick LaLota has threatened to halt future federal funding for vital infrastructure and public safety projects in jurisdictions that have enacted laws said to stymie federal enforcement actions, with the congressman taking particular aim at East Hampton Town and East Hampton Village.
Officials in the town and village responded by saying that they do not plan to back down from the enacted law, which is meant to boost transparency and establish reporting procedures in the event of a federal immigration action at the heart of the federal funding standoff.
Municipalities in the 1st District, each year, submit requests to the congressman’s office for Community Project Funding, which is used to fund environmental protections, public safety initiatives and critical infrastructure projects. LaLota boasted, in a letter to town and village officials, of having secured the third-highest amount of project funding in 2026 among the 26 representatives in New York.
The funding in question would be earmarked in the federal budgets for 2028 and beyond. This is because the 2026 budget has already been approved, and members of the House of Representatives have already submitted requests to the House Appropriations Committee for 2027. LaLota has asked for $43 million in funding in the 2027 budget.
Recent funding for community projects has gone toward police equipment. This year’s $27.1 million package covered 15 projects in the 1st District, including $785,900 toward a new police car and equipment in East Hampton Town — a rare community project funding win for the town.
“I welcome collaborating with you on how we can build on these successes, but with one condition: Moving forward, I will not support Community Project Funding requests from municipalities that have adopted policies, enacted laws or taken official actions that deliberately obstruct, impede or refuse lawful cooperation with federal authorities carrying out their responsibilities under federal law,” LaLota wrote.
LaLota did not spell out exactly what policies or laws he was referring to in the June 17 letter received by leadership in both East Hampton Town and East Hampton Village, but the message comes directly in the wake of both jurisdictions passing a law, drafted by OLA of Eastern Long Island, intended to bolster transparency in the event of a local federal immigration enforcement action.
He did, however, make direct reference to New York State’s prohibition on 287(g) agreements with Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE. These agreements are essentially partnerships between federal immigration agencies and local governments. The congressman said the state block on those agreements will make it “more difficult to identify and remove violent criminal illegal aliens from our communities.”
Both East Hampton Town and East Hampton Village added similar provisions — that is, blocking the partnerships — into the OLA law, though this clause was not included in OLA’s final iteration of the blueprint making the rounds to other municipalities on the East End over the past four months.
Since the letter went out, LaLota has since said the threats to federal earmarks come as a result of the “sanctuary policies” adopted in East Hampton Town and East Hampton Village, seemingly referring to the passage of the OLA law in the town and the village.
Recipients of the letter, though, did not just include East Hampton officials. Most town supervisors and village mayors in Suffolk County, at least those in LaLota’s district, also received a copy, alongside Suffolk County Executive Ed Romaine.
East Hampton officials, both town and village, were quick to say that they would not be intimidated by the congressman into abandoning any local laws or policies, and that federal tax dollars belong to taxpayers in East Hampton just as much as anyone else.
“LaLota threatened to cut off the federal dollars our residents are owed, including money for the very police equipment he took a victory lap over delivering five months ago, unless we let federal agents operate in our community however they please,” East Hampton Town Supervisor Kathee Burke-Gonzalez said. “Let me be clear: We will not be bullied by Nick LaLota, and he does not get to decide what East Hampton stands for.”
East Hampton Village Mayor Jerry Larsen said LaLota is free to disagree with village policy but said his administration also won’t be intimidated into abandoning a law he believes protects public safety, respects constitutional rights and serves the best interests of the community.
“Our law does not prevent federal authorities from enforcing federal immigration laws,” Larsen said. “It simply establishes how local resources are used and ensures that constitutional protections are respected.
“Federal tax dollars belong to the taxpayers of East Hampton Village, just as much as anyone else. We stand by the law we adopted, and we reject the idea that federal funding should be used as leverage to force local governments to abandon policies they lawfully enacted.”
The law pitched by OLA aims, primarily, to both establish a series of procedures and training programs that would help deter the impersonation of federal officers and adopt local requirements for reporting enforcement activity up and down the local chain, with the goal of making that information publicly available. The stated purpose is to boost public safety and accountability and clarify the place that local governments occupy, in the event of an ICE raid.
The East Hampton Village Board and East Hampton Town Board were fast out of the gate to pass the law, doing so in late April and early May, respectively. None of the remaining eight towns or villages with a police department on the East End have so far enacted the law.
OLA of Eastern Long Island Executive Director Minerva Perez, who championed the law, said the organization was deeply troubled by the congressman’s announcement that he could withhold funding from the local governments that adopt the public safety law in question.
Perez said the law does not obstruct, impede or refuse lawful cooperation with federal agencies but instead is meant to help local governments define their own responsibilities while building the trust necessary within the community for effective public safety.
“Local governments should not have to choose between exercising their lawful authority and receiving federal support for critical community projects,” Perez said.
Emotional public hearings, an adamant public and impassioned boards lined the brief path for both jurisdictions in passing the OLA law. In the wake of LaLota’s threats, Burke-Gonzalez vowed to keep the law in place, saying town officials will keep their word to their neighbors.
“Not long ago, a senior at East Hampton High School stood before the Town Board and said the fear never leaves the back of her mind that today might be the day something happens to her parents,” Burke-Gonzalez said. “I have not stopped thinking about her words.”
Comments