A Community-Wide Discussion About the Immigrant Experience, Regardless of Immigration Status, in Lexington

Transcription

1 A Community-Wide Discussion About the Immigrant Experience, Regardless of Immigration Status, in Lexington 1:45-2:00 Informal conversations February 25, 2018 Temple Isaiah 55 Lincoln Street 2:00-2:05 Opening Remarks 1. Tony Rodriguez and Todd Burger, co-chairs of Lexington People Power 2. Bonnie Brodner, Human Rights Committee (HRC) liaison 3. Don Detweiler, chair of the social action committee at Temple Isaiah 4. Eric VanLoon, moderator 2:05-2:10 Moderator describes meeting format, may explain Jamie Eldridge s expected late arrival if not yet present, then introduces speakers (All Speakers introduced by moderator unless noted otherwise) 2:10-2:40 Speakers (approx. 7 min. each): 1. Jamie Eldridge, MA State Senator, Middlesex & Worcester District 2. Laura Rotolo, American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts 3. Gabriel Camacho, American Friends Service Committee 4. LPD Spokesperson to summarize LPD point of view or Todd Burger (to relay our understanding of LPD views) 2:40-3:25 Q&A with speakers 3:25-3:30 Description of process ahead by Lexington People Power 3:30-3:45 Additional discussion with panelists if necessary

2 Heath Buckland Ashfield Colrain Conway Gill Erving Massachusetts Bay N EVERETT SOMERVILLE Belmont Norwell Scituate Hanover Marshfield Rockland Abington Avon Whitman Hull Cohasset QUINCY Hingham WEYMOUTH Holbrook Duxbury Provincetown BROCKTON* Wrentham West Bridgewater Kingston Plymouth* Cape Cod Bay Fairhaven Buzzards Bay Nantucket Sound Truro State Population Wellfleet % Eastham Bourne Sandwich BARNSTABLE* Dennis Yarmouth Orleans Brewster Harwich Chatham Mashpee Falmouth Tisbury t Seekonk Stoneham Massachusetts Towns and Cities that Have Passed Sanctuary or Welcoming Laws or Policies 2018 Population Municipality Estimate (millions) What Was Enacted? Description Amherst Bylaw Sanctuary City Acton BoS Policy Statement Sancturay Town Salisbury AMESBURY Leyden Goshen terfield Shelburne Whately Montague Northfield Warwick Orange Hatfield Belchertown HOLYOKE WESTFIELD Southwick Granby Pelham Royalston Athol Hardwick Barre GARDNER Hubbardston Ashburnham Ashby Townsend Templeton LEOMINSTER Petersham New Braintree Winchendon Bernardston FITCHBURG* GREENFIELD* Oakham Westminster Phillipston Wendell Deerfield Lancaster New Salem Shutesbury Leverett Sunderland Williamsburg Amherst NORTHAMPTON* North Westhampton ntington Brookfield Ware West Leicester Spencer Brookfield EAST- HAMPTON Brookfield East South Hadley Millbury Brookfield Southampton Ludlow PALMER Warren Montgomery sell Sturbridge WEST SPRINGFIELD Monson Brimfield Holland Wales Charlton Webster Dudley Auburn CHICOPEE Milford Oxford Sutton Hopedale Wilbraham SPRINGFIELD* Bellingham Uxbridge Douglas SOUTHBRIDGE Hampden AGAWAM Hadley Rutland Princeton Holden Sterling Clinton Berlin Boylston West Boylston Northborough Paxton Westborough Shrewsbury WORCESTER* Grafton Upton Groton Ayer Harvard Hopkinton Holliston Northbridge Mendon Westford Littleton Acton LAWRENCE* NEWTON Medway Carlisle Boxborough Concord Dover Sherborn Millis Dracut Billerica METHUEN Tewksbury Brookline Wellesley Norfolk Sharon Pembroke Hanson Foxborough Andover Tyngsborough Pepperell Dunstable LOWELL* Chelmsford Shirley Lunenburg Lincoln Maynard Bolton Stow Hudson Wayland MARLBOROUGH Sudbury Needham Southborough Milton Ashland BRAINTREE Westwood FRANKLIN East Longmeadow Longmeadow East Bridgewater Easton Plainville Mansfield Blackstone Millville Norton HAVERHILL Boxford Wakefield WOBURN MELROSE Winchester MALDEN Lexington REVERE Arlington MEDFORD WALTHAM WATERTOWN CAMBRIDGE* Weston BOSTON* Natick FRAMINGHAM Dedham* Norwood RANDOLPH Canton Medfield Stoughton Walpole North Attleborough ATTLEBORO Rehoboth Dighton Berkley Swansea FALL RIVER* Somerset Westport BRIDGEWATER Freetown Lakeville Dartmouth Halifax Middleborough Plympton Raynham TAUNTON* Merrimac West Newbury Newbury Ipswich BEVERLY Danvers WINTHROP Essex Hamilton LYNN Nahant Marblehead Carver NEWBURYPORT* Groveland Rowley Georgetown Rockport North Andover Topsfield Wenham North Reading Rochester Wareham Manchester by-the-sea GLOUCESTER Middleton Wilmington SALEM* PEABODY Lynnfield Reading Burlington Bedford Swampscott Saugus in capital letters. * Indicates County Seat. 14 Counties, with 39 cities and 312 towns. thirteen communities that have applied for, and been granted, city forms of government, though they e known as The Town of. They are: AGAWAM, BARNSTABLE, BRAINTREE, BRIDGEWATER, IN, GREENFIELD, PALMER, RANDOLPH, SOUTHBRIDGE, WATERTOWN, WEST SPRINGFIELD, UTH and WINTHROP. There are four communities that have been granted the title of city though they ve wards, they are: AMESBURY, EASTHAMPTON, METHUEN and FRAMINGHAM. CHELSEA Marion Acushnet Mattapoisett NEW BEDFORD* aphic center of Massachusetts is the Town of Rutland, Worcester County. wn: Plymouth ty: Boston own: East Brookfield ity: GARDNER y population: Town of Gosnold - 75, City of NORTH ADAMS - 13,708 population: Town of Brookline - 58,732, City of BOSTON - 617,594 Gosnold Boston City Ordinance Trust Act Brookline Resolution, Police Policy Manual Changes Sancturay Town Cambridge Resolution Sanctuary City Chelsea Resolution Sanctuary City Gill Resolution Sanctuary City Orleans Resolution? Sanctuary City Worcester Unofficial Adherence Refuses to cooperate with ICE Lawrence City Ordinance Trust Act Northhampton Somerville Mayoral Executive Order Mayoral Executive Order Sanctuary City Sanctuary City Arlington Resolution Welcoming City Newton City Ordinance Welcoming City Salem City Ordinance Sanctuary City Concord Resolution Welcoming City Bedford Resolution Welcoming City Total Edgartown* Aquinnah

3 105 CHAUNCY STREET 9TH FLOOR BOSTON, MA VOICE: FAX: The Safe Communities Act: What it Does & Doesn t Do WHAT THE SAFE COMMUNITIES ACT DOES: 1. It DOES prohibit the use of state databases or records for enforcement of any federal registry program based on religion or other protected characteristics (such as a Muslim registry). 2. It DOES limit state and local agencies involvement with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) by barring them from arresting or detaining a person solely for federal immigration enforcement purposes, or participating in inquiries, investigations or raids based solely on immigration status. 3. It DOES prohibit collaboration agreements between the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and law enforcement agencies that deputize state and local officers as immigration agents and co-opt state and local resources for federal purposes. 4. It DOES ensure basic due process rights for immigrants detained in state and local facilities, such as to be informed, in a language they understand, that they have a right to have their lawyer present for any interview by ICE agents. WHAT THE SAFE COMMUNITIES ACT DOESN T DO: 1. It DOES NOT stop police from investigating crimes or prosecuting anyone who commits a crime. On the contrary, it encourages immigrant witnesses and victims of crime to cooperate with police investigations, and ensures that police resources are not diverted from fighting crime. 2. It DOES NOT stop police from collaborating with federal agencies, including ICE, as part of criminal investigations, such as joint operations to stop gangs or drug traffickers. 3. It DOES NOT keep ICE from getting information about people who are arrested by default, all booking information is shared with numerous federal authorities, including the FBI and ICE, as required by federal law. 4. It DOES NOT keep ICE from conducting investigations, raids or arrests in Massachusetts communities, or interfere with those activities. 5. It DOES NOT jeopardize any community s federal funding, because the bill is carefully tailored to comply with all relevant federal laws. Indeed, although the bill was drafted well before U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions defined what constitutes a sanctuary jurisdiction, the provisions of the bill fall squarely outside that definition. SUPPORTED BY

4 The Effects of Sanctuary Policies on Crime and the Economy The data are clear: Crime is statistically significantly lower in sanctuary counties, compared to non-sanctuary counties. Moreover, economies are stronger in sanctuary counties from higher median household income, less poverty, and less reliance on public assistance to higher labor force participation, higher employment-to-population ratios and lower unemployment. Among the main findings (comparing sanctuary counties to non-sanctuary counties): There are, on average, 35.5 fewer crimes committed per 10,000 people Median household annual income is, on average, $4,353 higher The poverty rate is 2.3 percent lower, on average. Unemployment is, on average, 1.1 percent lower. While the results hold true across sanctuary jurisdictions, sanctuary counties with the smallest populations see the most pronounced effects. Altogether, the data suggest that when local law enforcement focuses on keeping communities safe, rather than becoming entangled in federal immigration enforcement efforts, communities are safer and community members stay more engaged in the local economy. This in turn brings benefits to individual households, communities, counties and the economy as a whole. Source: Center for American Progress, The Effects of Sanctuary Policies on Crime and the Economy, Tom K. Wong, January 26, 2017.

5 Brian A. Kyes, President 19 Park Street Fredrick Ryan, Vice President Richard C. Grimes, Secretary Chelsea, MA John LeLacheur, Treasurer Office (617) February 4, 2018 Re: Endorsement of Bill No. S.1305 & H As committed law enforcement leaders dedicated to preserving the safety and security of our respective communities across this great Commonwealth, both the members of the Massachusetts Chiefs of Police Association and the members of the Massachusetts Major City Police Chiefs Association are writing to express our support and endorsement of S.1305 & H.3269 titled an Act to Protect the Civil Rights and Safety of all Massachusetts Residents. While we are in agreement that civil immigration enforcement is primarily a federal law enforcement responsibility, which should be decoupled from state and local police enforcement priorities, we remain steadfast in our commitment that as officers sworn to protect and serve the public that we should be utilizing every strategic resource at our disposal to optimize and enhance the safety and security of our respective communities within the confines of all legal statutory and constitutional boundaries. Based on the recent SJC decision this past July in Lunn v. Commonwealth, police officers in this state no longer have the legal authority to honor immigration detainer requests received from federal law enforcement officials, which as the result of this decision have now been classified as new arrests requiring separate and independent probable cause beyond that for which the initial predicate arrest was originally made. Versions of this bill as originally filed in January of 2017 in both the House and in the Senate were recently amended over the last few months with the input and assistance from the aforementioned Police Chiefs Associations working in close collaboration and partnership with members of our State Legislature and other important community advocacy leaders. The redraft of this bill now allows for what we view as a more effective balance of both building and improving trust in our respective communities while simultaneously enhancing public safety across the entire State. The modified version of this bill allows for a limited, yet effective, 6-hour no-bail provision period for those individuals arrested by local and state police who also have a conviction on their respective criminal records for certain violent offenses or who have been arrested for a terrorism related offense and who Federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement Officials (ICE) also have what is deemed to be an actionable interest in based on the confirmation of received biometric fingerprint data that was acquired by police during the administrative booking procedure for the offense for which the individual was initially arrested. Arlington, Attleboro, Beverly, Boston, Brockton, Brookline, Cambridge, Chelsea, Chicopee, Everett, Fall River Fitchburg, Framingham, Haverhill, Holyoke, Lawrence, Lowell, Lynn, Malden, Massachusetts Bay Transit Authority, Massachusetts State Police, Medford, Methuen, New Bedford, Newton, Peabody, Pittsfield, Quincy, Revere, Salem, Somerville, Springfield, Taunton, Waltham, West Springfield, Weymouth, Woburn, Worcester

6 We believe that this newly modified bill is a commonsense, policy prudent, and safety-orientated approach to addressing the existing gap in the state of the current law in this Commonwealth that was created by way of the SJC s decision in Lunn. Without this bill, State and local police would remain unable to detain any arrestee for any period of time despite the issuance of a federal ICE detainer, even an individual with a demonstrated propensity for committing violence based on their history of prior felony convictions on their record, to allow for the possibility of federal ICE agents to conduct an interview and possibly take the arrestee into federal custody if the circumstances were warranted. This important legislative change will absolutely enhance public safety in our respective communities by preventing dangerous individuals who meet the aforementioned criteria from being released back into our cities and towns to potentially reoffend and commit further acts of violence. Therefore, it is our collective hope that both the Senate and the House will act favorably on this important public safety legislation and submit it to the Governor for his astute review and consideration and ultimate signature to make this bill become law across our Commonwealth. We remain available for any questions or concerns that may result. Sincerely, Chief Brian A. Kyes President, Major City Police Chiefs Association Chairman, MCOPA Legislative Committee CC: Chief Stephen Wojnar, President MCOPA Mark Leahy, Executive Director, MCOPA

7

8 MAKING LEXINGTON A WELCOMING, SAFE, AND INCLUSIVE COMMUNITY Since the Board of Selectmen (BoS) 2017 Proclamation states that: Lexington is committed to making the town a safe place for all, then passing the motion below is the next logical step to make sure there is an enforceable safe communities act policy for Lexington. Lexington People Power proposes going beyond our current nonbinding proclamation that places no real limits on police conduct and offers no real protection for undocumented immigrants: This motion seeks to build trust between immigrant communities and local town officials by ensuring that all people receive equal treatment under the law. Specifically, it will limit the Lexington Police Department s involvement with federal immigration officials on matters that are solely concerning immigration enforcement. When local police collaborate with ICE (immigration and Custom Enforcement), it erodes trust in the community. When people are afraid that interaction with any town agency will lead to questions about their immigration status, they will not seek help, they will not report crimes, and they will not cooperate with police in fighting crime. This motion intends to proclaim the Town of Lexington s endorsement of the Safe Communities Act and will request the Town to codify all relevant sections included in the statewide SCA bill into either its General Laws or into the Town s Public Employees Policy Manuals.