GREAT-42 CC 21-413 AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO ENTER INTO AN INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH THE U.S. IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT HOMELAND SECURITY INVESTIGATIONS (GREAT-42)
Council of the County of Maui
GOVERNMENT RELATIONS, ETHICS, AND TRANSPARENCY COMMITTEE
Public Meeting Tuesday November 16, 2021
Re: Opposition to AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO ENTER INTO AN INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH THE U.S. IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT HOMELAND SECURITY INVESTIGATIONS (GREAT-42).
Dear Councilmembers and Mayor Victorino,
The Medical-Legal Partnership (MLP) represents patients at community health centers with their legal needs and also engages in systemic advocacy in partnership with the health centers and client communities. The majority of our clients and community partners are Pacific Islander immigrants. The MLP has worked with clients and engaged in community education and advocacy work on Maui, including work with health centers and community-based Micronesian organizations.
It has come to our attention that the Government Relations, Ethics, and Transparency Committee of the County Council of Maui will be deliberating on Tuesday, November 12, on a bill that would authorize the Mayor of Maui County to enter into a special agreement with ICE Homeland Security Investigations (ICE HSI).
First, we oppose the above-proposed measure as it stands because of the limited information provided at this time. The Memorandum of Understanding (MOU – ICE Form 73-002) states, “HSI agrees to Designate certain employees of Maui Police Department as Customs Officers (Excepted), without additional compensation, to perform the duties as noted on the ‘Designation, Customs Officer (Excepted) - Title 19 Task Force Officer’ (ICE Form 73-001). This form is attached and is hereby made part of this MOU.” However, this ICE Form 73-001 was not attached as promised nor was it made publically available in a way that we could find. As a result, we oppose this measure without transparent, detailed public information on what the program would actually entail.
In particular, the proposed bill raises the following questions:
• Which duties will be assigned to designated MPD officers who are "deputized” and trained by ICE/HSI?
• When are MPD officers authorized to ask suspects, victims, and witnesses questions about their immigration status, social security number, and/or place of birth?
• Does the Council have a plan for oversight, accountability and transparency?
• Has the Council analyzed the risks vs. benefits for the immigrant community under this agreement? Research shows that victims and witnesses in immigrant communities may be less likely to report crimes if they know that local police may be deputized as ICE officers.
• Will Maui taxpayer’s money be used to carry out federal ICE duties?
Second, we oppose the above-proposed measure as it stands, because we are concerned with the chilling effects of local law enforcement collaboration with ICE departments on immigrant communities, which already face barriers to seeking protections from law enforcement—from language access to fear. For example, at the MLP we have seen examples of immigrant domestic violence (DV) victims and other crime victims choosing not to go to police because of fear. This also impacts U.S. citizens living in mixed-status households and immigrants are all statuses, documented or otherwise.
We believe there is another pathway to accomplish public safety goals without eroding trust between the MPD and the immigrant community. Thank you for this opportunity to submit testimony opposing the above bill.
Dina Shek
Legal Director, Medical-Legal Partnership for Children in Hawai‘i
Deleted User
almost 3 years ago
Re Item 42: Please ask Mr. Martin or the authors of the proposed ICE agreement what amount of funding the County stands to gain from this agreement, and why the local MPD officers aren't paid more for this collateral duty. Then please consider whether that amount of support justifies giving MPD officers collateral duty for the federal ICE HSI agency without extra pay. MPD must then carry out orders based on their ICE HSI training that could impact their foreign-born relatives, neighbors and friends. Mr. Martin offered testimony clarifying that MPD officers would not be deputized under the ICE/HSI agreement to enforce violations of individual immigration status matters. Immigrant rights advocates following this understand that. However, we also know--both from first hand experience and studies/reports from other cities where this type of HSI-local law enforcement agreement has been implemented - that there are unintended negative consequences for foreign-born residents.
Date: November 16, 2021
Re: GREAT 42 – AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO ENTER INTO AN INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREMENT WITH THE US IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT HOMELAND SECURITY INVESTIGATIONS
Dear Chair Molina and Committee Members, Aloha and Good Morning!
I am in opposition to the agreement with ICE, for several reasons.
1. It will delete the trust the community has develop with Maui Police over the years.
2. ICE is a federal agency and it should be treated like a federal agency separate from a community police.
3. It will give Maui Police Officers another task, that they didn't sign up for it. Will this include additional pay?
4. It violates human rights all across the spectrum and there will be law suits against Maui County, who will pay for this?
5. ICE lacks training and is constanly profiling all those that look like from a similar culture.
6. Definitely a negative perspective for Maui overall.
Thank you for allowing me to provide a few words to you, if is in any help, I am always available for additional testimony and also let me mention that for over 2 years, I provided an aculturation class to Maui Police Department and was able to train at the time all the 340 Maui Police Officers.
Cesar Gaxiola
Executive Director
J. Walter Cameron Center
Wailuku, HI 96793
(808) 244-5546 Office
(808) 298-8428 Mobile
Michael Molina, Chair
Maui County Council
Government Relations, Ethics and Transparency Committee
200 South High Street, 8th Floor
Wailuku, HI 96793
Date: November 16, 2021
Re: GREAT 42 – AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO ENTER INTO AN INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREMENT WITH THE US IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT HOMELAND SECURITY INVESTIGATIONS
Dear Chair Molina:
I have been a licensed attorney since 2013 and am currently the principal in a firm that provides representation in all types of immigration and nationality cases. Prior to this, I was the Director of the Immigrant Services Division for the County of Maui. My practice is exclusively immigration related and I have appeared before all the applicable agencies in this field including the Immigration Court (EOIR/ US DOJ); the Board of Immigration Appeals; the Department of Homeland Security(“DHS”) (USCIS and USICE) and the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. I have testified as an expert in the second circuit as well as providing in-service training and immigration law training to numerous agencies and non-profits including the Family Court Bar of the HSBA, the Maui County Public Defender’s Office, the Hawaii State Judiciary and the Maui County Council.
I am the Vice-Chair of the Hawaii Chapter of the American Immigration Lawyers Association and I sit on the Board of Directors of the Hawaii Affiliate of the American Civil Liberties Union, although I do not speak on their behalf today.
I stand in opposition to the proposed IGA between ICE and the Maui Police Department, at least until the following issues are addressed and until there is a concrete plan for oversight, transparency and accountability.
There is a history of agreements between local law enforcement and ICE during the last decade or so, most notably the 287G type agreements in which, like the agreement proposed here, local law enforcement are “deputized” by ICE and perform some or many of their enforcement actions. Because of this history, there has been time to access and document some of the effects of these agreements and here are some of the findings (Sources include the American Immigration Council, The Migration Policy Institute and the Brookings Institute)
1. Erosion of trust and threat to community safety:
In Hawaii, close to 20% of the population are “immigrants (foreign born) with close to 60,000 families (although actual data is difficult to produce accurately) in “mixed status” families in which one or more people may be undocumented.
Perhaps the most important collateral effect of these agreements is that if a person is a victim, or even a witness to a crime, they may not call the police for help or to report if they think the police officer, or might be, a deputized ICE officer.
Trust between local police and the immigrant community is already hard won and fragile. Many of us have worked hard over the past decades to build that trust through the Domestic Violence Task Force, outreach and community building efforts and that trust can easily be eroded and destroyed.
In 2005, the International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP), the nations premier law enforcement association stated:
Local Police agencies depend on the cooperation of immigrants, legal and otherwise, in solving all sorts of crimes and in the maintenance of public order. Without assurances that they will not be subject to an immigration investigation and possible deportation, many immigrants with critical information would not come forward, even when heinous crimes are committed against them or their families.
In 2019, the Major Cities Chiefs Association (MCCA), a group of police chiefs from th largest police forces in the US and Canada found that “Without assurances that contact with the police would not result in purely civil immigration enforcement action, the hard-won trust communication and cooperation from the immigrant community would disappear.
2. These agreements can lead to constitutional violations and violations of individual civil rights:
Department of Justice investigations of two different County Sheriff’s Offices in Arizona and North Carolina with 287G agreements, similar to this one, revealed widespread constitutional violations including racial profiling, illegal stops and other civil rights violations. (Source: American Immigration Council)
3. These agreements can lead to arrests of individuals without criminal histories
These agreements have a collateral effect of leading to the targeting and arrest of individuals who have no criminal history for nothing other than status offense. Each one of these arrests represents trauma to a family and the community.
A study by the UNC Chapel Hill revealed that 57% of arrests stemming from a 287G agreement in Gaston County were of individuals with no criminal conviction and many of those resulted in depurations which effectively spearted and destroyed families. (Source: Migration Policy Institute)
4. These agreements can be expensive for localities
The Maricopa County Program that was shut down, referenced in Number 2 above created a $1.3-million-dollar deficit. Harris County Texas: $675,000. Mecklenburg County North Carolina: $5.3 million. Alamance County: $4.8 million. Prince William County: $6.4 million.
(Source: Brookings Institution)
5. ICE does not provide sufficient guidance, direction, supervision or support:
A Government Accountabilility Office report from January of 2021 found that there were insufficient performance goals to measure success and concluded that there was no effective oversight for these types of programs as a result. The report also found that there was no standard to determine compliance with the MOU.
I have reviewed the proposed MOU that is before the council and these are the specific questions that I have about it:
A. Are these agreements legal or do they violate the anti-commandeering clause of the 10th amendment?
B. What safeguards are there that "deputized" MPD officers will not ask suspects, victims and witnesses questions about their place of birth, status or social security numbers?
C. This may have a negative impact on community policing as victims and witnesses in immigrant communities will be less likely to report crimes if they know the MPD officer is, or may be, a deputized ICE officer. What assurances and safeguard are there for the immigrant community that they will be safe and not targeted?
D. Does the council have a plan for oversight, accountability and transparency?
E. Can we see ICE Form 73-001 (Its not available online)? What duties will be assigned to designated MPD officers who are "deputized?"
F. The language of the MOU mentions "Abuse of HSI cross designation” What would that look like and what is the reporting and accountability plan to ensure that such abuses do not occur?
G. Item #3 if the MOU says that deputized officers can "enforce the full range of Federal Offenses" but that HSI is "not conveying the authority to enforce administrative violations of immigration law." These statements seem contradictory.
H. Do the rights and duties of this MOU extend to other branches of ICE, like ERO, or are they limited to HSI?
I. Do other Counties in the State have these agreements? If not, why not?
Thank you for allowing me to provide testimony. I am available as a resource, either individually to the council members or to the body as a whole, if that would be helpful.
As the Government Relations, Ethics, and Transparency Committee of the County Council of Maui deliberates this proposal on Tuesday, November 12, to authorize the Mayor of Maui County to enter into a special agreement with ICE Homeland Security Investigations (ICE), I hope you will consider these comments.
I serve as pastor to people in my faith who reside on Maui. I am also a member of the NY State Bar and have accompanied and supported those seeking asylum in Immigration Court who reside on Maui. On these and other occasions, I have had the chance to hear directly from members of our community about their fears as they navigate the federal asylum and migration process, which is difficult and fraught with terrible trauma, expense, and pain already for so many. On behalf of those whose lives this will directly impact and on behalf of those I serve as pastor, I ask that you pause authorization of this measure until the public has had sufficient opportunity to learn about it and to provide input.
There are many questions raised by this measure. In particular, what will be the scope of discretion MPD officers will be permitted to exercise? How will MPD discretion and authority be monitored and my whom? Will Maui taxpayers be funding these efforts?
Perhaps more pressing than any of these is the idea that Maui peace officers will take on the role of inquiring and perhaps examining the immigration status of Maui residents. Over and over, throughout every jurisdiction that starts permitting local officers to inquire into these matters, non-citizen residents report feeling scared or worried to call police when they are the victims of domestic violence, fraud, sexual assault, and a range of other crimes that non-citizen residents, as more vulnerable members of our community, experience in real and painful ways. Let us not take this step lightly, removing yet another layer of dignity and real safety for some of the most vulnerable among us.
I have faith in the ingenuity and compassion of our lawmakers. I know there are ways to meet the safety needs of all of our residents without taking this step. I humbly ask you to postpone this agenda item to allow for more community input and to share answers to these questions in the many beautiful languages spoken an understood by all in our community.
Submitted with love and aloha,
Rev. T. J. FitzGerald
First Unitarian Church of Honolulu
minister@unitariansofhi.org
Oppose and Comments from Amy Agbayani, co-chair Hawai`i Friends of Civil Rights
At this time in Hawai`i and the nation, there is an increase in anti-immigrant, anti Asian and Pacific Islanders, as well as ICE and local police. Has there been any recent incidents or problems that require this bill? Is there any urgency to approve this bill/MOU at this time? I have not had the opportunity to check if the other county police officers have such an agreement or are proposing one. We respectfully request you to defer/postpose approving this request for an MOU .between local law enforcement and Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) of ICE (Immigrations & Customs Enforcement).
I am in touch with immigrant community advocacy groups who are concerned about possible racial profiling, lack of language access and other additional questions
Which duties will be assigned to designated MPD officers who are "deputized” and trained by ICE/HSI?
When are MPD officers authorized to ask suspects, victims, and witnesses questions about their immigration status, social security number, and/or place of birth?
Does the Council have a plan for oversight, accountability and transparency?
Has the Council analyzed the risks vs. benefits for the immigrant community under this agreement? Research shows that victims and witnesses in immigrant communities may be less likely to report crimes if they know that local police may be deputized as ICE officers.
Will Maui taxpayer’s money be used to carry out federal ICE duties?
Are there other alternatives to accomplish public safety goals that increases trust and compliance between MPD and the immigrant communitiess?
Dear Mayor Victorino, Council Members: Mike Molina, Kelly Takaya King, Keani Rawlins-Fernandez, Shane Senenci, and Tamara Paltin,
It has come to my attention that the Government Relations, Ethics, and Transparency Committee of the County Council of Maui will be deliberating on Tuesday, November 16, on a bill that would authorize the Mayor of Maui County to enter into a special agreement with ICE Homeland Security Investigations (ICE). Given the historical context of other agreements between ICE and local law enforcement, the proposed authorization raises concerns for our state’s foreign-born residents and their trust in the Maui Police Department (MPD).
As an immigrant activist and advocate who has worked and advocated for immigrants on; Maui, Oahu, Kauai, and the Big Island, I ask that you please consider our community as a whole. I, as well as other advocates and community organizations, have worked hard to encourage members of our immigrant communities to trust local law enforcement and to report crimes such as domestic violence, etc.If local police enforcement is given job duties and powers to act as ICE agents, this will force the community to further distrust the police. Immigration is a Federal agency, whereas police are under the County. Our police officers serve and protect all of Hawaii’s residents, regardless of immigration status. I believe these two agencies and their functions should remain separate. I understand that at times ICE, asks for Police assistance however these actions create distrust towards our Police officers. Our Police officers should not be put in situations where the community they serve, further distrusts them. Please do not put our Officers in this situation. Please do not permit Federal Agencies to utilize our Police officers for Immigration and Customs Enforcement purposes.
Please consider Hawaii’s long history of Immigrant inclusion and how as a State we are trying to increase Immigrant inclusion. Please don’t forget the economic contributions of our immigrant communities and how vital they are to Hawai’i. There are many reports available to help you reflect, and understand our immigrant communities, their hardships, as well as contributions to Hawai’i.
As you are well aware, there was a series of ICE raids in 2008 on Maui and a subsequent response by local and state community organizations given the abuse of ICE officials and local law enforcement regarding racial profiling surrounding these incidents, and how they affect the entire Latino population, regardless of citizenship status. This racial assumption of Latinos with undocumented status and criminality is also well known, given the history of racial stereotypes that continue to be prevalent in the news media. This is to say that although there are undocumented migrants in Maui and other parts of Hawaiʻi from various countries around the world who will be impacted by this agreement, it is the Latino population who will bear the brunt of this policy given these past incidents. This agreement also sounds all too familiar to the policies that terrorized the Latino communities of Arizona, with the passing of the draconian legislation known as Arizona SB1070 in 2010. Currently, COVID has greatly impacted immigrants’ access to renewing their identification documents since consulates have not been in Hawaiʻi for the past two years due to the pandemic, which jeopardizes their ability to keep their documented status up to date at no fault of their own. All this will do is create continued mistrust and fear of local law enforcement by the Latino community in particular, especially if they are the victims of crimes, and if these unanswered questions leave open the opportunity for abuse and racial profiling by deputized MPD officers who have their own implicit racial biases.
On behalf of Maui’s immigrant communities, I ask that you reconsider approving such authorization until the public has had sufficient opportunity to learn about the bill and to provide input. In particular, the proposed bill raises the following questions:
· Which duties will be assigned to designated MPD officers who are "deputized” and trained by ICE/HSI?
· When are MPD officers authorized to ask suspects, victims, and witnesses questions about their immigration status, social security number, and/or place of birth?
· Does the Council have a plan for oversight, accountability, and transparency?
· Has the Council analyzed the risks vs. benefits for the immigrant community under this agreement? Research shows that victims and witnesses in immigrant communities may be less likely to report crimes if they know that local police may be deputized as ICE officers.
· Will Maui taxpayer’s money be used to carry out Federal ICE duties?
We believe there is another pathway to accomplish public safety goals without eroding trust between the MPD and the immigrant community. Please consider postponing this agenda item to allow for more community input and to share answers to these questions (with appropriate language interpretation).
I have the same concerns as commenter Bettina Mok. The civil rights/civil liberties record of ICE is dismal, and ICE's penchant for mistreatment of immigrants, even those who are present in the US legally, is notorious. I oppose any authorization for our local police department - overstretched as it already is - to be "deputized" to assist in ICE operations in any way. Surely some way can be found to train our police in the use of body cameras without involving them in the affairs of a widely and deservedly despised federal law enforcement agency known to have been heavily infiltrated by white supremacists. https://immigrationimpact.com/2021/02/11/border-patrol-racism-history/#.YZGwzmDMI2w
Given the historical context of agreements between ICE and local law enforcement, this proposed authorization raises concerns about the implications for our state’s foreign-born residents. The Legal Clinic is a nonprofit organization that advocates for fair immigration policies in Hawaiʻi, and which provides immigration legal services to assist our state’s low-income residents—including Maui residents.
While the HSI’s function is to investigate transnational crime and not to enforce individual violations of immigration law, national immigrant advocates found that in recent years, HIS agents were “increasingly complicit in roundups fueled by racial profiling…and workplace raids that left communities traumatized” (Immigrant Legal Resource Center).
. We ask that you reconsider approving such an authorization until the public has had sufficient opportunity to learn about the bill and to provide input. In particular, the proposed bill raises the following questions:
• In the risk vs. benefit analysis has the Council considered the effect on the immigrant community? Research shows that victims and witnesses in immigrant communities may be less likely to report crimes if they know that an MPD officer is, or may be, a deputized ICE officer.
• Which duties will be assigned to designated MPD officers who are "deputized”?
• When are MPD officers authorized to ask suspects, victims, and witnesses questions about their immigration status, social security number, and/or place of birth?
• Does the council have a plan for oversight, accountability and transparency?
• Will notice of MPD's new duties be shared with the public in various languages?
• Will Maui taxpayer’s money be used to carry out federal ICE duties?
We believe there is another pathway to accomplish legitimate public safety goals without eroding trust between the MPD and the immigrant community. 49% of Maui's agricultural workers and over 35% of Maui's Tourism, Recreation, and Hospitality workers are foreign-born. Please consider postponing this agenda item to allow for more community input, and to share answers to these questions. Mahalo.
Council of the County of Maui
GOVERNMENT RELATIONS, ETHICS, AND TRANSPARENCY COMMITTEE
Public Meeting Tuesday November 16, 2021
Re: Opposition to AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO ENTER INTO AN INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH THE U.S. IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT HOMELAND SECURITY INVESTIGATIONS (GREAT-42).
Dear Councilmembers and Mayor Victorino,
The Medical-Legal Partnership (MLP) represents patients at community health centers with their legal needs and also engages in systemic advocacy in partnership with the health centers and client communities. The majority of our clients and community partners are Pacific Islander immigrants. The MLP has worked with clients and engaged in community education and advocacy work on Maui, including work with health centers and community-based Micronesian organizations.
It has come to our attention that the Government Relations, Ethics, and Transparency Committee of the County Council of Maui will be deliberating on Tuesday, November 12, on a bill that would authorize the Mayor of Maui County to enter into a special agreement with ICE Homeland Security Investigations (ICE HSI).
First, we oppose the above-proposed measure as it stands because of the limited information provided at this time. The Memorandum of Understanding (MOU – ICE Form 73-002) states, “HSI agrees to Designate certain employees of Maui Police Department as Customs Officers (Excepted), without additional compensation, to perform the duties as noted on the ‘Designation, Customs Officer (Excepted) - Title 19 Task Force Officer’ (ICE Form 73-001). This form is attached and is hereby made part of this MOU.” However, this ICE Form 73-001 was not attached as promised nor was it made publically available in a way that we could find. As a result, we oppose this measure without transparent, detailed public information on what the program would actually entail.
In particular, the proposed bill raises the following questions:
• Which duties will be assigned to designated MPD officers who are "deputized” and trained by ICE/HSI?
• When are MPD officers authorized to ask suspects, victims, and witnesses questions about their immigration status, social security number, and/or place of birth?
• Does the Council have a plan for oversight, accountability and transparency?
• Has the Council analyzed the risks vs. benefits for the immigrant community under this agreement? Research shows that victims and witnesses in immigrant communities may be less likely to report crimes if they know that local police may be deputized as ICE officers.
• Will Maui taxpayer’s money be used to carry out federal ICE duties?
Second, we oppose the above-proposed measure as it stands, because we are concerned with the chilling effects of local law enforcement collaboration with ICE departments on immigrant communities, which already face barriers to seeking protections from law enforcement—from language access to fear. For example, at the MLP we have seen examples of immigrant domestic violence (DV) victims and other crime victims choosing not to go to police because of fear. This also impacts U.S. citizens living in mixed-status households and immigrants are all statuses, documented or otherwise.
We believe there is another pathway to accomplish public safety goals without eroding trust between the MPD and the immigrant community. Thank you for this opportunity to submit testimony opposing the above bill.
Dina Shek
Legal Director, Medical-Legal Partnership for Children in Hawai‘i
Re Item 42: Please ask Mr. Martin or the authors of the proposed ICE agreement what amount of funding the County stands to gain from this agreement, and why the local MPD officers aren't paid more for this collateral duty. Then please consider whether that amount of support justifies giving MPD officers collateral duty for the federal ICE HSI agency without extra pay. MPD must then carry out orders based on their ICE HSI training that could impact their foreign-born relatives, neighbors and friends. Mr. Martin offered testimony clarifying that MPD officers would not be deputized under the ICE/HSI agreement to enforce violations of individual immigration status matters. Immigrant rights advocates following this understand that. However, we also know--both from first hand experience and studies/reports from other cities where this type of HSI-local law enforcement agreement has been implemented - that there are unintended negative consequences for foreign-born residents.
Date: November 16, 2021
Re: GREAT 42 – AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO ENTER INTO AN INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREMENT WITH THE US IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT HOMELAND SECURITY INVESTIGATIONS
Dear Chair Molina and Committee Members, Aloha and Good Morning!
I am in opposition to the agreement with ICE, for several reasons.
1. It will delete the trust the community has develop with Maui Police over the years.
2. ICE is a federal agency and it should be treated like a federal agency separate from a community police.
3. It will give Maui Police Officers another task, that they didn't sign up for it. Will this include additional pay?
4. It violates human rights all across the spectrum and there will be law suits against Maui County, who will pay for this?
5. ICE lacks training and is constanly profiling all those that look like from a similar culture.
6. Definitely a negative perspective for Maui overall.
Thank you for allowing me to provide a few words to you, if is in any help, I am always available for additional testimony and also let me mention that for over 2 years, I provided an aculturation class to Maui Police Department and was able to train at the time all the 340 Maui Police Officers.
Cesar Gaxiola
Executive Director
J. Walter Cameron Center
Wailuku, HI 96793
(808) 244-5546 Office
(808) 298-8428 Mobile
Michael Molina, Chair
Maui County Council
Government Relations, Ethics and Transparency Committee
200 South High Street, 8th Floor
Wailuku, HI 96793
Date: November 16, 2021
Re: GREAT 42 – AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO ENTER INTO AN INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREMENT WITH THE US IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT HOMELAND SECURITY INVESTIGATIONS
Dear Chair Molina:
I have been a licensed attorney since 2013 and am currently the principal in a firm that provides representation in all types of immigration and nationality cases. Prior to this, I was the Director of the Immigrant Services Division for the County of Maui. My practice is exclusively immigration related and I have appeared before all the applicable agencies in this field including the Immigration Court (EOIR/ US DOJ); the Board of Immigration Appeals; the Department of Homeland Security(“DHS”) (USCIS and USICE) and the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. I have testified as an expert in the second circuit as well as providing in-service training and immigration law training to numerous agencies and non-profits including the Family Court Bar of the HSBA, the Maui County Public Defender’s Office, the Hawaii State Judiciary and the Maui County Council.
I am the Vice-Chair of the Hawaii Chapter of the American Immigration Lawyers Association and I sit on the Board of Directors of the Hawaii Affiliate of the American Civil Liberties Union, although I do not speak on their behalf today.
I stand in opposition to the proposed IGA between ICE and the Maui Police Department, at least until the following issues are addressed and until there is a concrete plan for oversight, transparency and accountability.
There is a history of agreements between local law enforcement and ICE during the last decade or so, most notably the 287G type agreements in which, like the agreement proposed here, local law enforcement are “deputized” by ICE and perform some or many of their enforcement actions. Because of this history, there has been time to access and document some of the effects of these agreements and here are some of the findings (Sources include the American Immigration Council, The Migration Policy Institute and the Brookings Institute)
1. Erosion of trust and threat to community safety:
In Hawaii, close to 20% of the population are “immigrants (foreign born) with close to 60,000 families (although actual data is difficult to produce accurately) in “mixed status” families in which one or more people may be undocumented.
Perhaps the most important collateral effect of these agreements is that if a person is a victim, or even a witness to a crime, they may not call the police for help or to report if they think the police officer, or might be, a deputized ICE officer.
Trust between local police and the immigrant community is already hard won and fragile. Many of us have worked hard over the past decades to build that trust through the Domestic Violence Task Force, outreach and community building efforts and that trust can easily be eroded and destroyed.
In 2005, the International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP), the nations premier law enforcement association stated:
Local Police agencies depend on the cooperation of immigrants, legal and otherwise, in solving all sorts of crimes and in the maintenance of public order. Without assurances that they will not be subject to an immigration investigation and possible deportation, many immigrants with critical information would not come forward, even when heinous crimes are committed against them or their families.
In 2019, the Major Cities Chiefs Association (MCCA), a group of police chiefs from th largest police forces in the US and Canada found that “Without assurances that contact with the police would not result in purely civil immigration enforcement action, the hard-won trust communication and cooperation from the immigrant community would disappear.
2. These agreements can lead to constitutional violations and violations of individual civil rights:
Department of Justice investigations of two different County Sheriff’s Offices in Arizona and North Carolina with 287G agreements, similar to this one, revealed widespread constitutional violations including racial profiling, illegal stops and other civil rights violations. (Source: American Immigration Council)
3. These agreements can lead to arrests of individuals without criminal histories
These agreements have a collateral effect of leading to the targeting and arrest of individuals who have no criminal history for nothing other than status offense. Each one of these arrests represents trauma to a family and the community.
A study by the UNC Chapel Hill revealed that 57% of arrests stemming from a 287G agreement in Gaston County were of individuals with no criminal conviction and many of those resulted in depurations which effectively spearted and destroyed families. (Source: Migration Policy Institute)
4. These agreements can be expensive for localities
The Maricopa County Program that was shut down, referenced in Number 2 above created a $1.3-million-dollar deficit. Harris County Texas: $675,000. Mecklenburg County North Carolina: $5.3 million. Alamance County: $4.8 million. Prince William County: $6.4 million.
(Source: Brookings Institution)
5. ICE does not provide sufficient guidance, direction, supervision or support:
A Government Accountabilility Office report from January of 2021 found that there were insufficient performance goals to measure success and concluded that there was no effective oversight for these types of programs as a result. The report also found that there was no standard to determine compliance with the MOU.
I have reviewed the proposed MOU that is before the council and these are the specific questions that I have about it:
A. Are these agreements legal or do they violate the anti-commandeering clause of the 10th amendment?
B. What safeguards are there that "deputized" MPD officers will not ask suspects, victims and witnesses questions about their place of birth, status or social security numbers?
C. This may have a negative impact on community policing as victims and witnesses in immigrant communities will be less likely to report crimes if they know the MPD officer is, or may be, a deputized ICE officer. What assurances and safeguard are there for the immigrant community that they will be safe and not targeted?
D. Does the council have a plan for oversight, accountability and transparency?
E. Can we see ICE Form 73-001 (Its not available online)? What duties will be assigned to designated MPD officers who are "deputized?"
F. The language of the MOU mentions "Abuse of HSI cross designation” What would that look like and what is the reporting and accountability plan to ensure that such abuses do not occur?
G. Item #3 if the MOU says that deputized officers can "enforce the full range of Federal Offenses" but that HSI is "not conveying the authority to enforce administrative violations of immigration law." These statements seem contradictory.
H. Do the rights and duties of this MOU extend to other branches of ICE, like ERO, or are they limited to HSI?
I. Do other Counties in the State have these agreements? If not, why not?
Thank you for allowing me to provide testimony. I am available as a resource, either individually to the council members or to the body as a whole, if that would be helpful.
s:/Kevin Block
November 16, 2021
Dear Councilmembers Mayor Victorino:
As the Government Relations, Ethics, and Transparency Committee of the County Council of Maui deliberates this proposal on Tuesday, November 12, to authorize the Mayor of Maui County to enter into a special agreement with ICE Homeland Security Investigations (ICE), I hope you will consider these comments.
I serve as pastor to people in my faith who reside on Maui. I am also a member of the NY State Bar and have accompanied and supported those seeking asylum in Immigration Court who reside on Maui. On these and other occasions, I have had the chance to hear directly from members of our community about their fears as they navigate the federal asylum and migration process, which is difficult and fraught with terrible trauma, expense, and pain already for so many. On behalf of those whose lives this will directly impact and on behalf of those I serve as pastor, I ask that you pause authorization of this measure until the public has had sufficient opportunity to learn about it and to provide input.
There are many questions raised by this measure. In particular, what will be the scope of discretion MPD officers will be permitted to exercise? How will MPD discretion and authority be monitored and my whom? Will Maui taxpayers be funding these efforts?
Perhaps more pressing than any of these is the idea that Maui peace officers will take on the role of inquiring and perhaps examining the immigration status of Maui residents. Over and over, throughout every jurisdiction that starts permitting local officers to inquire into these matters, non-citizen residents report feeling scared or worried to call police when they are the victims of domestic violence, fraud, sexual assault, and a range of other crimes that non-citizen residents, as more vulnerable members of our community, experience in real and painful ways. Let us not take this step lightly, removing yet another layer of dignity and real safety for some of the most vulnerable among us.
I have faith in the ingenuity and compassion of our lawmakers. I know there are ways to meet the safety needs of all of our residents without taking this step. I humbly ask you to postpone this agenda item to allow for more community input and to share answers to these questions in the many beautiful languages spoken an understood by all in our community.
Submitted with love and aloha,
Rev. T. J. FitzGerald
First Unitarian Church of Honolulu
minister@unitariansofhi.org
Oppose and Comments from Amy Agbayani, co-chair Hawai`i Friends of Civil Rights
At this time in Hawai`i and the nation, there is an increase in anti-immigrant, anti Asian and Pacific Islanders, as well as ICE and local police. Has there been any recent incidents or problems that require this bill? Is there any urgency to approve this bill/MOU at this time? I have not had the opportunity to check if the other county police officers have such an agreement or are proposing one. We respectfully request you to defer/postpose approving this request for an MOU .between local law enforcement and Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) of ICE (Immigrations & Customs Enforcement).
I am in touch with immigrant community advocacy groups who are concerned about possible racial profiling, lack of language access and other additional questions
Which duties will be assigned to designated MPD officers who are "deputized” and trained by ICE/HSI?
When are MPD officers authorized to ask suspects, victims, and witnesses questions about their immigration status, social security number, and/or place of birth?
Does the Council have a plan for oversight, accountability and transparency?
Has the Council analyzed the risks vs. benefits for the immigrant community under this agreement? Research shows that victims and witnesses in immigrant communities may be less likely to report crimes if they know that local police may be deputized as ICE officers.
Will Maui taxpayer’s money be used to carry out federal ICE duties?
Are there other alternatives to accomplish public safety goals that increases trust and compliance between MPD and the immigrant communitiess?
Testimony received from Great Committee.
Maui Economic Opportunity urges further vetting of the measure. See attached pdf for complete testimony.
Dear Mayor Victorino, Council Members: Mike Molina, Kelly Takaya King, Keani Rawlins-Fernandez, Shane Senenci, and Tamara Paltin,
It has come to my attention that the Government Relations, Ethics, and Transparency Committee of the County Council of Maui will be deliberating on Tuesday, November 16, on a bill that would authorize the Mayor of Maui County to enter into a special agreement with ICE Homeland Security Investigations (ICE). Given the historical context of other agreements between ICE and local law enforcement, the proposed authorization raises concerns for our state’s foreign-born residents and their trust in the Maui Police Department (MPD).
As an immigrant activist and advocate who has worked and advocated for immigrants on; Maui, Oahu, Kauai, and the Big Island, I ask that you please consider our community as a whole. I, as well as other advocates and community organizations, have worked hard to encourage members of our immigrant communities to trust local law enforcement and to report crimes such as domestic violence, etc.If local police enforcement is given job duties and powers to act as ICE agents, this will force the community to further distrust the police. Immigration is a Federal agency, whereas police are under the County. Our police officers serve and protect all of Hawaii’s residents, regardless of immigration status. I believe these two agencies and their functions should remain separate. I understand that at times ICE, asks for Police assistance however these actions create distrust towards our Police officers. Our Police officers should not be put in situations where the community they serve, further distrusts them. Please do not put our Officers in this situation. Please do not permit Federal Agencies to utilize our Police officers for Immigration and Customs Enforcement purposes.
Please consider Hawaii’s long history of Immigrant inclusion and how as a State we are trying to increase Immigrant inclusion. Please don’t forget the economic contributions of our immigrant communities and how vital they are to Hawai’i. There are many reports available to help you reflect, and understand our immigrant communities, their hardships, as well as contributions to Hawai’i.
https://research.newamericaneconomy.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2021/08/Hawaii_COVID_Brief-v8.pdf
As you are well aware, there was a series of ICE raids in 2008 on Maui and a subsequent response by local and state community organizations given the abuse of ICE officials and local law enforcement regarding racial profiling surrounding these incidents, and how they affect the entire Latino population, regardless of citizenship status. This racial assumption of Latinos with undocumented status and criminality is also well known, given the history of racial stereotypes that continue to be prevalent in the news media. This is to say that although there are undocumented migrants in Maui and other parts of Hawaiʻi from various countries around the world who will be impacted by this agreement, it is the Latino population who will bear the brunt of this policy given these past incidents. This agreement also sounds all too familiar to the policies that terrorized the Latino communities of Arizona, with the passing of the draconian legislation known as Arizona SB1070 in 2010. Currently, COVID has greatly impacted immigrants’ access to renewing their identification documents since consulates have not been in Hawaiʻi for the past two years due to the pandemic, which jeopardizes their ability to keep their documented status up to date at no fault of their own. All this will do is create continued mistrust and fear of local law enforcement by the Latino community in particular, especially if they are the victims of crimes, and if these unanswered questions leave open the opportunity for abuse and racial profiling by deputized MPD officers who have their own implicit racial biases.
On behalf of Maui’s immigrant communities, I ask that you reconsider approving such authorization until the public has had sufficient opportunity to learn about the bill and to provide input. In particular, the proposed bill raises the following questions:
· Which duties will be assigned to designated MPD officers who are "deputized” and trained by ICE/HSI?
· When are MPD officers authorized to ask suspects, victims, and witnesses questions about their immigration status, social security number, and/or place of birth?
· Does the Council have a plan for oversight, accountability, and transparency?
· Has the Council analyzed the risks vs. benefits for the immigrant community under this agreement? Research shows that victims and witnesses in immigrant communities may be less likely to report crimes if they know that local police may be deputized as ICE officers.
· Will Maui taxpayer’s money be used to carry out Federal ICE duties?
We believe there is another pathway to accomplish public safety goals without eroding trust between the MPD and the immigrant community. Please consider postponing this agenda item to allow for more community input and to share answers to these questions (with appropriate language interpretation).
Mahalo and Gracias,
Angela Dean
Advocate for Immigrants
I have the same concerns as commenter Bettina Mok. The civil rights/civil liberties record of ICE is dismal, and ICE's penchant for mistreatment of immigrants, even those who are present in the US legally, is notorious. I oppose any authorization for our local police department - overstretched as it already is - to be "deputized" to assist in ICE operations in any way. Surely some way can be found to train our police in the use of body cameras without involving them in the affairs of a widely and deservedly despised federal law enforcement agency known to have been heavily infiltrated by white supremacists. https://immigrationimpact.com/2021/02/11/border-patrol-racism-history/#.YZGwzmDMI2w
Given the historical context of agreements between ICE and local law enforcement, this proposed authorization raises concerns about the implications for our state’s foreign-born residents. The Legal Clinic is a nonprofit organization that advocates for fair immigration policies in Hawaiʻi, and which provides immigration legal services to assist our state’s low-income residents—including Maui residents.
While the HSI’s function is to investigate transnational crime and not to enforce individual violations of immigration law, national immigrant advocates found that in recent years, HIS agents were “increasingly complicit in roundups fueled by racial profiling…and workplace raids that left communities traumatized” (Immigrant Legal Resource Center).
. We ask that you reconsider approving such an authorization until the public has had sufficient opportunity to learn about the bill and to provide input. In particular, the proposed bill raises the following questions:
• In the risk vs. benefit analysis has the Council considered the effect on the immigrant community? Research shows that victims and witnesses in immigrant communities may be less likely to report crimes if they know that an MPD officer is, or may be, a deputized ICE officer.
• Which duties will be assigned to designated MPD officers who are "deputized”?
• When are MPD officers authorized to ask suspects, victims, and witnesses questions about their immigration status, social security number, and/or place of birth?
• Does the council have a plan for oversight, accountability and transparency?
• Will notice of MPD's new duties be shared with the public in various languages?
• Will Maui taxpayer’s money be used to carry out federal ICE duties?
We believe there is another pathway to accomplish legitimate public safety goals without eroding trust between the MPD and the immigrant community. 49% of Maui's agricultural workers and over 35% of Maui's Tourism, Recreation, and Hospitality workers are foreign-born. Please consider postponing this agenda item to allow for more community input, and to share answers to these questions. Mahalo.