NORWICH — Voters will decide at Town Meeting whether to adopt a policy barring Norwich police from inquiring about a person’s immigration status or sharing immigration-related information with federal authorities.

Supporters of the petitioned article last week were informed they garnered the required signatures — about 10% of registered Norwich voters — to include a proposed “Fair and Impartial Policing Policy” on the March Town Meeting warning in Norwich.

The policy, which is similar to proposals being considered in Lebanon and Hartford, would prohibit “biased policing” or the enforcement of “federal civil immigration law.”

That means police couldn’t stop or detain people solely because of their suspected immigration status. Officers also would be banned from holding people on federal “immigration detainers” or sharing immigration-related information unless as part of the investigation of a felony.

“It doesn’t deter police from doing their job and it makes (Norwich) a welcoming place,” Sharon Racusin, who led the petition drive, said of the proposal Thursday.

Racusin, who is a member of the activist Vermont Workers’ Center, said the policy is almost “verbatim” to one adopted by Winooski, Vt., about two years ago.

The proposal is needed, she said, to help people of color and immigrants feel comfortable interacting with police in the Upper Valley. It isn’t meant to malign Norwich police, she added.

“We can like our police officers and believe very much in the fact that local police should not be doing immigration work,” Racusin said. “They can do their job without having to work for Customs and Border Patrol.”

Norwich Police Chief Jennifer Frank was unavailable to comment on the proposal Thursday.

Hartford Police Chief Phil Kasten has said town police don’t ask people about their immigration status and that current policy says it’s not their place to enforce immigration laws. He’s also worried the proposal would violate federal law pertaining to communication between government agencies and the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service.

Norwich Town Manager Herb Durfee said Thursday he hasn’t had the chance to formally review the proposal.

“I haven’t developed any kind of opinion except for this is a delicate, sensitive topic at this point, and I’ll continue to look at it,” he said in a phone interview.

News of the Norwich warning article comes just a week after the Hartford Selectboard decided to send a similar “Welcoming Hartford Ordinance” to the polls without a “savings clause” intended to avoid conflict with federal law.

The clause would have explicitly said the ordinance does not restrict local police from sending information to federal authorities regarding a person’s immigration status.

Neighboring Lebanon also will hold a hearing Wednesday night on a welcoming ordinance that was petitioned for the city ballot.

There, city councilors will decide whether to adopt the measure outright, make changes or send the measure to voters as is.

A recent legal review of the Lebanon proposal found it is largely legal and would be held up if challenged in court. However, Lebanon’s attorney Bernie Waugh took issue with one section that calls on the city to “inform residents” when federal immigration officers are present.

The provision is too vague and doesn’t describe how or who the city should be informing, Waugh wrote in a Jan. 13 memo to the City Council. Such warnings also could be seen as obstruction of federal officers, he added.

The City Council is scheduled to discuss the proposal at 7 p.m. on Wednesday at the auditorium of the former Seminary Hill School in West Lebanon.

Tim Camerato can be reached at tcamerato@vnews.com or 603-727-3223.

Correction

The Lebanon  City Council is scheduled to discuss a proposed “Welcoming Lebanon Ordinance” at 7 p.m. on Wednesday in the auditorium of the former Seminary Hill School, now home to SAU 88 offices, in West Lebanon. An earlier version of this story gave an incorrect meeting location.