The leaked proposal I covered shows a new blueprint for how to build detention center capacity. Now, I’m releasing the tool I built to watch the whole country.
A friend alerted me to a proposal in the town of Killingly in Windham County, CT, for a warehouse of 1 million sq feet. The proposal is now before the planning and zoning commission. The end user is unknown. That is about all I know.
Does it match the ICE profile? Partially — unknown tenant, I-395 access, rural New England. But 1.3M sqft exceeds any confirmed ICE purchase and CT has no current detention infrastructure. It could equally be a hyperscale data center buildout (Killingly already had a https://ctmirror.org/2025/08/07/tariffs-uncertainty-killingly-battery-project/). Data centers raise their own community concerns — water, power grid, minimal employment.
Either way, the question at the P&Z hearing is the same: "Who is the end user?" If the answer is "we can't disclose," press harder. File a https://detention-pipeline.transparencycascade.org/foia/ for communications between town officials and and federal agency or undisclosed tenant.
County-held lease (like Bradford County, FL): The sheriff keeps the warehouse when ICE stops paying. The leaked proposal I published literally promises the county an "improved property" at closeout. The financial incentive to find a new use doesn't go away.
Federal purchase (11 warehouses bought through a military procurement bypass): These are now government property. Surplus disposal takes years — or never happens.
Private prison operators (GEO Group, CoreCivic, GardaWorld): They own or operate the facilities and need to fill beds to turn a profit. Their business model generates its own demand.
In every scenario, the infrastructure outlasts the politics that built it.
This is a real early-warning system — not a rumor mill. When the same county keeps lighting up across contracts, staffing, “activation” language, budget distress, and private-prison money, that’s a pipeline forming in plain sight. Putting that into a map people can check for their own home county is power.
In San Antonio, TX, ICE is trying to set up a warehouse. Various groups spoke against it at a Bexar County Commissioners Court hearing in March. No sure what is next.
I did a bit of research documented the fight. The Bexar County page now reflects the March 10 Commissioners Court vote (4-1 opposing), the city council moratorium vote, and the legal challenge being prepared with the EPA law firm.
Yea. I have a contact who may be able to help on that front. It would be good to show inventory too. And if there is enough interest I could get an account and organize some of that data.
http://detentionstats.com is an independent public dashboard that visualizes U.S. immigration detention statistics. ICE publishes detention data every two weeks, and the site makes those numbers easier to read and track over time. The Substack goes deeper: statistical analysis, trend breakdowns, plain-English explanations of what the figures actually show. The most recent piece covers the April 2026 snapshot.
A friend alerted me to a proposal in the town of Killingly in Windham County, CT, for a warehouse of 1 million sq feet. The proposal is now before the planning and zoning commission. The end user is unknown. That is about all I know.
Thank you — this is exactly how the system is supposed to work.
I've researched it. There are actually three simultaneous warehouse proposals in Killingly.
The Day has been covering:
https://theday.com/news/869007/opposition-builds-against-proposed-warehouses-in-killingly/
Does it match the ICE profile? Partially — unknown tenant, I-395 access, rural New England. But 1.3M sqft exceeds any confirmed ICE purchase and CT has no current detention infrastructure. It could equally be a hyperscale data center buildout (Killingly already had a https://ctmirror.org/2025/08/07/tariffs-uncertainty-killingly-battery-project/). Data centers raise their own community concerns — water, power grid, minimal employment.
Either way, the question at the P&Z hearing is the same: "Who is the end user?" If the answer is "we can't disclose," press harder. File a https://detention-pipeline.transparencycascade.org/foia/ for communications between town officials and and federal agency or undisclosed tenant.
I've added Killingly to the https://detention-pipeline.transparencycascade.org/ as a real estate trace.
Local knowledge meets national pattern recognition — keep watching.
Note:
At least in duckduckgo this Colliers (Mashentuck road)site certificate cannot be trusted
Impressive database tool you've put together.
Unfortunately my brain is not working after too many hours on line today. Will have to revisit !
Wow they really want these massive camps badly .They are desperate to get their nefarious chambers up and running .Why so many if for deportations ?
Well there is also NSPM-7, but I am sure it is fine. They would never abuse power.
Wow! Bobbie Anne Cox was asked in her interview about detention centers and what would happen after this administration was done using them. That made me wonder. I then searched detention centers, and I came across your Substack. I am really concerned now! Here is the interview: https://attorneycox.substack.com/p/is-there-a-demonization-within-our?r=1tpuqr&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web
Hi Liz — really glad this found you.
It depends on which model built the facility:
County-held lease (like Bradford County, FL): The sheriff keeps the warehouse when ICE stops paying. The leaked proposal I published literally promises the county an "improved property" at closeout. The financial incentive to find a new use doesn't go away.
Federal purchase (11 warehouses bought through a military procurement bypass): These are now government property. Surplus disposal takes years — or never happens.
Private prison operators (GEO Group, CoreCivic, GardaWorld): They own or operate the facilities and need to fill beds to turn a profit. Their business model generates its own demand.
In every scenario, the infrastructure outlasts the politics that built it.
Nice tool, good work. I'm glad I subscribed.
https://gtfoice.org/action-guide
This is a real early-warning system — not a rumor mill. When the same county keeps lighting up across contracts, staffing, “activation” language, budget distress, and private-prison money, that’s a pipeline forming in plain sight. Putting that into a map people can check for their own home county is power.
Thank you
In San Antonio, TX, ICE is trying to set up a warehouse. Various groups spoke against it at a Bexar County Commissioners Court hearing in March. No sure what is next.
Thank you for this tip, Darcy.
I did a bit of research documented the fight. The Bexar County page now reflects the March 10 Commissioners Court vote (4-1 opposing), the city council moratorium vote, and the legal challenge being prepared with the EPA law firm.
County page: https://detention-pipeline.transparencycascade.org/county/48029/
Fight page: https://detention-pipeline.transparencycascade.org/fights/bexar-county-tx-warehouse-fight/
We identified six opposition groups (SAGE, LULAC, San Antonio Unity, SA Students for Peace, Students for Change, ICE Out of San Antonio).
I am working on researching the fight there and will get it added to the site and the map.
Loopnet.com Commercial spaces for auction lease sale just popped into mind
Yea. I have a contact who may be able to help on that front. It would be good to show inventory too. And if there is enough interest I could get an account and organize some of that data.
http://detentionstats.com is an independent public dashboard that visualizes U.S. immigration detention statistics. ICE publishes detention data every two weeks, and the site makes those numbers easier to read and track over time. The Substack goes deeper: statistical analysis, trend breakdowns, plain-English explanations of what the figures actually show. The most recent piece covers the April 2026 snapshot.