The St. Lawrence County Democratic Committee officers oppose any 287(g) agreement between the Sheriff and ICE at this time.

To be crystal clear, the timing of this resolution is terrible. It was brought forward only five days after the death of Renee Good and Alex Pretti was killed in interim.

It’s happening as there is a turnover in ICE’s leadership and former ICE officials at ICE are saying the culture of ICE has changed.  It’s happening as over 20 other areas have discontinued their agreements with ICE. 

It’s happening as we hear how ICE agents are being told they don’t need judicial warrants to enter homes in clear violation of the Fourth Amendment of the US Constitution against unreasonable search and seizure and in violation of their oaths to that Constitution.  

In addition to all those concerns over any further association with this agency, there are three principal reasons to vote against this resolution. 

1. This resolution has been hurried and needs further study and consideration, and this is the first public hearing on this. While the revised resolution is less ambiguous than the original concerning which model would be implemented in the top “whereas”  section, the legally binding bottom “be it resolved” section does not spell out which model will be used.  The sheriff has now inserted that a review process will be implemented, which is an improvement.  But there is no rubric yet for this process.  The Jail Enforcement model only kicks in when someone is remanded after arrest for a qualified Class B Felony, which sounds good.  Yet in other places, there are reports the model accompanied a dramatic increase in arrests of Latinos.  As one example of what could go in this rubric, the review process could in good faith compare numbers of non-caucasians remanded to jail for Class B felonies in the past to what happens under this model to demonstrate this abuse is not occurring.

2. The proposal simply does not make fiscal or operational sense for St. Lawrence County. For a board that prides itself on frugality and public safety and has complained about unfunded mandates from Albany, this resolution is counterintuitive.   This resolution shifts a federal responsibility to county taxpayers.
3. Finally, this resolution and subsequent agreement with ICE feeds divisiveness within our county and communities. As you have seen since the introduction of the resolution, public outcry and demonstration has increased. 

In closing, the Sheriff and his staff have demonstrated good faith over the past three weeks by communicating with the public, the press, and meeting with constituent groups to hear and voice concerns. 

The Sheriff has offered to evaluate the program after a period of time, but that evaluation process and rubric should be created before such a program exists rather than building the plane while it’s flying. The program should have clearly articulated goals and outcomes that benefit the residents of St. Lawrence County. 

Rather than passing this resolution this evening, the County would be better served by the formation of a community task force to study the issue from all angles, obviously with the sheriff’s input, and to explore avenues and methods for improvement, and to present recommendations to the Legislature. 

We thank you for your time, and we implore you to vote no on this resolution.

Submitted by St. Lawrence County Democratic Committee