On February 7, 2017, the Board of Supervisors referral to the Public Protection Committee the topic of law enforcement participation and interaction with Federal immigration authorities. A copy of the Board's referral is attached for reference.
Subsequently, the PPC introduced this referral at it's March 2017 meeting, primarily to discuss Senate Bill 54 (De Leon), which at the time was newly introduced in the Legislature. The Committee directed the County Probation Department to have County Counsel review the current policy on immigration (including cooperation with the federal government and serving clients that are undocumented residents of the County) and return to the Committee with an update. In addition, the Committee requested a review of the Sheriff's Office contract with the US Marshal service, which is also used by the Department of Homeland Security - Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to house undocumented individuals who are in the custody of the federal government.
The Committee had not heard an update on this issue, pending the outcome of SB 54, which ultimately was passed by the Legislature and signed into law by Governor Brown earlier this year. Following its passage and enrollment, the Probation Department and Sheriff's Office have worked with County Counsel proactively to ensure that the County is in compliance with the requirements of the new law.
Federal Grant Requirements and Related Legal Challenges
Following the March 2017 meeting of the Committee, the US Department of Justice began conditioning certain federal grant awards to state and local governments on the cooperation with federal immigration authorities. This has been rolled out in the form of 1) requesting the jurisdictions receiving grants to self certify (under penalty of perjury by the Chief Legal Officer, in our case County Counsel) that the jurisdiction is in compliance with the conditions of 8 USC 1373, and 2) that the jurisdiction would honor 48-hour detainer requests for undocumented individuals already in local custody for separate criminal law violations. Neither the Probation Department nor the Sheriff's Office honor detainer requests from the federal government and have not done so for several years.
There have been several legal challenges to the Administration's various actions on immigration. Most notably with regard to the withholding of funding from state and local governments is City of Chicago vs. Sessions III, where a nationwide injunction has been ordered against the new regulations sought to be imposed by the USDOJ. An article from the Chicago Tribune has been included in today's packet for additional information.
Also, a coalition of local jurisdictions nationwide, including cities and counties, filed an amicus brief in City of Philadelphia vs. Sessions III on October 19th of this year in support of the City's motion for preliminary injunction. In this case, the City is largely requesting an injunction very similar to that ordered in the Chicago case. A copy of the brief is included in today's packet for reference.
Potential for Financial Impact to the County
As the legal challenges described above progress, the County will continue to be mindful of the potential impacts to County programs. At first glance, it may be easy to determine that any financial impact from the change in federal policy would only impact law enforcement activities; however, several County departments receive funding from USDOJ and DHS. The summary below illustrates a worst case scenario to the County - that is, that all grant funds from both federal agencies are discontinued.
The federal government has been choosing certain grants to apply the new regulations to, but there generally does not seem to be a specific criteria used to determine what grants the regulations may be applied to. For this reason, it is highly unlikely that the entire $24.7 million could be impacted, but in the interest of proactively understanding the portfolio of grants maintained by the County, staff prepared this chart as a tool for discussion purposes.
On November 6, 2017, the Committee received an update on this referral and directed staff to schedule a special meeting in December for followup. Specifically, staff presented a report on how the County is working proactively to ensure smooth implementation of the requirements of SB 54, to the extent that the County does not already meet those requirements. This included an analysis by County Counsel of the current policies for each department against the new requirements of SB 54 for easy reference. The Committee asked for an updated version of the analysis for the December meeting, which is included in today's packet. Also, the actual policies from both the Sheriff's Office and the Probation Department (draft) were included for reference. In addition, Committee staff provided a brief overview on the issues related to the potential financial impacts from US DOJ and DHS grant conditions on certain federal grant awards. The Committee also discussed the Sheriff's Office contract with the US Marshal services, which is used by ICE to house detainees currently in the custody of the federal government and requested a copy of the contract be included in the December packet for reference.
On December 7, 2017, the Committee received an update on various, ongoing litigation items across the country and the status of updates to the immigration policies of the Sheriff's Office and Probation Department. In addition, County Counsel prepared an updated analysis of existing policies and Committee staff included a copy of the interagency agreement between the US Marshal Service and the Sheriff's Office for review. The US Marshal contract is used by the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Agency to house undocumented detainees that are already in the custody of the federal government in County jail facilities. The Committee requested that the issue return at the February 5, 2018 Committee meeting for an update.
On February 5, 2018, staff updated the Committee on various litigation related to immigration across the nation and reported on the County's compliance with SB 54 following the January 1, 2018 effective date. In addition, staff reported that the U.S. Department of Justice appears to be satisfied with the County's revised immigration policy in the Sheriff's Office, which strikes a balance with complying with both federal and state law. Also, the Public Defender's Office provided an update on efforts to launch the County's Stand Together Contra Costa program, which provide various services to undocumented residents in the County seeking assistance. Following discussion, the Committee directed staff to return to return to the next meeting with information related to the public forum required under the Truth Act and a litigation update. |
Staff will be present to provide an update on the following items:
1. Various litigation items being tracked by the Committee related to immigration.
2. Update on the County's compliance with the Truth Act public forum review process required by Government Code section 7283.1(d). For reference, a copy of the relevant code section is included below:
(d) Beginning January 1, 2018, the local governing body of any county, city, or city and county in which a local law enforcement agency has provided ICE access to an individual during the last year shall hold at least one community forum during the following year, that is open to the public, in an accessible location, and with at least 30 days' notice to provide information to the public about ICE's access to individuals and to receive and consider public comment. As part of this forum, the local law enforcement agency may provide the governing body with data it maintains regarding the number and demographic characteristics of individuals to whom the agency has provided ICE access, the date ICE access was provided, and whether the ICE access was provided through a hold, transfer, or notification request or through other means. Data may be provided in the form of statistics or, if statistics are not maintained, individual records, provided that personally identifiable information shall be redacted. |