The nonprofit Escucha Mi Voz, and a large crowd of protesters, accompanies immigrants Sept. 2, 2025, who are going in for Immigration and Customs Enforcement check-ins in southwest Cedar Rapids. The U.S. Department of Homeland Security used vehicles to block street entrances and strung police line tape along the perimeter of the facility. Now the DHS is proposing to erect tall fences on the property. (Jim Slosiarek/The Gazette)

The Gazette offers audio versions of articles using Instaread. Some words may be mispronounced.

CEDAR RAPIDS — A battle over plans to erect tall fences outside the southwest Cedar Rapids headquarters of Immigration and Customs Enforcement — a scene of frequent protests — now has a new front: the city’s Historic Preservation Commission.

Once home to Pepco, a printing company that closed in the 1990s, the building originally was designed by architect Leo Peiffer — who also designed several other well-known buildings in Cedar Rapids, including the National Czech & Slovak Museum & Library and downtown’s Five Seasons Center and Crowne Plaza Five Seasons Hotel, now the city’s DoubleTree Hotel convention center complex. Several community members would like to see what’s now the ICE office designated as historical.

The headquarters, 3351 Square D Dr. SW, is rented by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and is used as its headquarters for ICE in Eastern Iowa. ICE said it determined the property is not eligible for the National Register of Historic Places, but turned to the city’s Historic Preservation Commission for its input on plans to erect fences there.

Ongoing dispute over fences

Discussions about the historical significance of the building are the latest step in an ongoing dispute between DHS and Escucha Mi Voz — an Iowa City-based nonprofit that hosts monthly rallies outside the office to support immigrants attending their check-in appointments with ICE — over a plan by the DHS to erect fences outside the building that would keep protesters away from immigrants waiting in line for their appointments.

The proposed fences would include a 10-foot-tall portion on the side of the building, as well as a 7-foot-tall portion in the front of the building, according to a letter DHS sent this month to the preservation commission. DHS also plans to add privacy netting to existing chain link fencing. The letter does not say whether the new fences would also be chain-link or have privacy netting installed.

A map showing new proposed fencing outside the Cedar Rapids DHS office, from a letter sent by DHS to the Cedar Rapids Historical Preservation Commission.

The dispute started in 2025, when DHS put up a police tape barrier on the front lawn of the office in response to the growing size of the rallies. Escucha Mi Voz has organized the rallies for several years, often accompanying immigrants into the ICE building in the past to provide translation services and support.

ICE restricted access to the building in 2025, barring rally organizers from entering, and eventually put up the police tape several feet away from where immigrants wait in line for their appointments. The nonprofit pushed back, reaching out to the city to complain that the public right of way in front of the building was being restricted.

DHS, in response, filed a request with the city for a permit to block the public right of way. But city of Cedar Rapids staff later said they discovered an error in the property record that would place the proposed location of the fences on the federally rented property, rather than in the public right of way — meaning a permit wouldn’t be needed.

A man waves to cheering supporters Feb. 4, 2025, after coming out of the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement office in southwest Cedar Rapids following his immigration check-in. Escucha Mi Voz and the Iowa City Catholic Worker House accompanied 11 people, including three families, during a vigil there. (Jim Slosiarek/The Gazette)

Preservation commission considers fences

DHS did not make any visible moves to begin erecting the fences until Feb. 10, when it submitted a letter to the Cedar Rapids Historical Preservation Commission, which the commission considered Thursday during a meeting.

DHS said it was notifying the commission about the proposed fence and inviting members to be involved in consultation on the project, which federal agencies are required to do when they begin any undertaking that could potentially affect a historical building. The commission does not have any power to approve to reject the fence, but can offer commentary about any concerns it has about the proposal.

“By 1993, the structure had been expanded to its current form by installing a new large metal warehouse-like addition on the southern and western elevations,” the DHS letter reads. “The construction of the large addition in the 90s destroyed any integrity of design, materials, workmanship, association, and feeling. As such, ICE has determined that the subject property is ineligible for the National Register of Historic Places.”

Dozens of community members came to the meeting Thursday to speak during public comment about their concerns about the fence — and some to express disagreement with the conclusion that the building is not historically significant.

Alyssa Kupka read a statement from her mother, Lora Edwards, whose late husband, Charles Edwards, commissioned the building in the mid-1970s for Pepco. “Because he wanted to maintain … high-end standards and the brand recognition that goes with it, he built a uniquely designed modern building that was made with the finest materials,” Kupka told the commission. “... He wanted brick and mortar, and wood and lots of cement — class with a modern edge.”

While Kupka read her statement, Lora Edwards handed out photos to the commission showing the original building, as well as photos showing what it looked like after her husband had Peiffer design an addition to the building in the mid-80s. The photos look similar to the current appearance, except for a more recent addition of blue siding where there used to be wood.

Several other community members spoke after Kupka, both about the historical significance of the building and about their belief that a tall fence would be detrimental.

“People go to that building to immigrate here the legal way, to become citizens alongside us and live in our community. ICE already has a fence around the back. They have what they need. Do not let them ruin historic property because they claim to need more space to harm our immigrant community,” Cedar Rapids resident Ashley Gordon told commissioners.

“I know that your duty is to historical preservation, so if you find there are no historical preservation qualms with this building, I propose this commission abstain from making a statement of support, out of your sense of morality,” Cedar Rapids resident Abby Long said. “This is bigger than historic preservation. It’s bigger than you and me and everybody in this room. This is about transparency and accessibility, justice and liberty.”

‘Try to minimize it as much as possible’

A majority of the commission agreed they would rather not see the fences go up. But if they do, those members wanted less than the proposed 7 and 10 feet sections.

“A fence does impact the view from the street, and therefore it impacts Cedar Rapids heritage. But since we don’t have the final say, I would say, try to minimize it as much as possible,” commission Chair Diana Pagan said.

“It would have a large negative impact on the historic integrity of the property, and it also inherently denies the community access to that historic property,” Commissioner Jacob Cournoyer said.

The commission noted that no survey has been done to determine whether the building would be eligible to be listed on the National Register of Historic Places. Commissioners decided to include a recommendation that a survey be conducted before the fences are built.

Commissioner Jeff Meyers disagreed with the other commissioners’ comments, and asked that the response state the commission was divided whether the building should be considered a historical asset.

“I don’t have a problem with the fence itself. We’re looking at something that is not going to effect the actual materials of the building. It doesn’t impact the integrity of the building. … It has a nice story, from what I heard earlier, for sure, but that is not the same as a historical asset,” Meyers said. “Obviously, it’s a sensitive topic for folks, but if we’re just looking through the lens of historical preservation, it seems like a bit of a reach to advise them not to do it.”

The commission approved a motion to send comments to DHS about the fences, stating that the majority believes the building should be considered a historical asset and would advise against erecting the fences, or would recommend making it shorter — but that there was disagreement among members of the commission.

Comments: (319) 398-8328; emily.andersen@thegazette.com

More Stories