By PAULA TRACY, InDepthNH.org
CONCORD – A Democrat-backed bill that requires local budgetary authority approval before law enforcement agencies can enter an agreement with federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement got a hearing Thursday.
House Bill 1570-FN-L would require such a pact to assist in the enforcement of federal immigration law.
The bill also grants the budgetary authority continuing power to terminate the agreement and provides for a penalty for failure to comply.
The bill is sponsored by Rep. Albert “Buzz” Scherr, D-Portsmouth. and has four co-sponsors all of whom are Democrats. It was heard by the House Criminal Justice and Public Safety Committee.
The bill says the legislature recognizes that some law enforcement agencies in New Hampshire will seek to engage in Section 287(g) agreements with ICE.
“Because those law enforcement agencies carry the complete cost of their participation in such agreements, the general court deems it essential to ground the decision to participate in such agreements in the governmental authority that oversees the budget of those law enforcement agencies and represents its constituents,” it reads.
The measure would amend RSA 106-P by inserting that “if a law enforcement agency in New Hampshire intends to apply for a Section 287(g) agreement with United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement pursuant to this chapter, it must first receive permission from the governmental budget authority that has final authority over its budget.”
It would require a formal estimate of the yearly cost to that agency including an estimate of the number of employee hours that will be devoted to participation in the agreement.
It also provides that the governmental body may decline to approve the agreement based on the cost. It also calls for quarterly reports.
Online testimony submissions showed 483 people in support of the bill and nine opposed.
The Department of Safety Division of State Police already has a working 287(g) agreement, and any training or notices required by the bill would be negligible.
“Since NHSP only uses their 287(g) authority as part of their normal work, it’s hard to predict any added day-to-day costs. The Department states a more significant cost comes from the bill’s quarterly reporting requirement. None of the State Police systems currently have a way to tag or track when Troopers are doing 287(g) work. Creating new codes and having the software companies update these systems could cost around $10,000 and take several months,” according to the Department of Safety analysis.
Until those updates are in place, the Department states that pulling the needed information by hand would be very time-consuming, likely requiring the hire of a new position at an estimated cost of $91,000 in FY 2027, $81,000 in FY 2028, and $83,000 in FY 2029 using 75 percent general funds and 25 percent highway funds.
“This bill provides neither authorization nor appropriation for new personnel,” according to the Department of Safety analysis.
The New Hampshire Association of Counties noted the bill would require the county delegation to vote on any contract that county or county officials enter with ICE, to which it believes would have no added cost.
The New Hampshire Municipal Association reported that the bill changes the responsible party in a municipality authorized to apply for entry or enter into an agreement with the United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement to participate in a federal 287(g) program pursuant to 8 U.S.C. section 1357(g).
“As such, the Association states the bill itself does not have an impact on local revenues or expenditures,” it reads.
Scherr, who is also on the Portsmouth Police Commission and will soon become its chair, said this bill is not about whether you like what ICE is doing or don’t like what ICE is doing. It’s about money.
Scherr is also a professor at UNH law school. He said the basis of the bill arises from the fact that when an agency enters into a 287 (g) agreement and the members of the department are qualified after 40 hours of (online) training as ICE proxies they are acting on behalf of the federal government, but the town is paying the hours.
He said that is different from 287 (g) agreements with county houses of correction. There, he said, the county corrections officials negotiate with ICE a daily fee for detaining and holding ICE detainees.
“Houses of correction get paid for doing ICE work. Local law enforcement does not,” Scherr said. “It is on the town’s dime.” He said this bill gives the final budget authority the final say.
“Its about the money,” he stressed “New Hampshire towns and cities should not be paying to do ICE’s work, particularly now that ICE’s budget has been tripled. It is not like they don’t have the money. That is the purpose of the bill.”
Scherr said the term “final budget authority” in the bill can be the board of selectmen, a city council, the county commissioners in the case of sheriffs’ departments.
He noted that currently the 40-hours of training to be an ICE proxy for the Rockingham County Sheriff’s Department is on their dime.
Chairman Terry Roy, R-Deerfield, asked if any departments have blown their budget on this.
Not yet, Scherr said, but noted it is early.
Nor did he say he has heard of departments receiving equipment and weapons from ICE in exchange.
“This is the wrong time for the town not to have control on what their officers do,” he said.
Roy asked if it was true that ICE is paying overtime and up to one quarter of an officer’s salary. He said Troy is receiving funding.
If the department is getting reimbursed there is nothing in the bill to get in the way of that.
Rep. Tim Horrigan, D-Durham, spoke in support of the bill.
“Here in New Hampshire we should not spend a penny to support ICE,” Horrigan said. “If it was in our power I would just like to ban them altogether.”
What Ice is doing “is worse than any Venezuelan or El Salvadorian gang could be doing to people,” Horrigan said.
They were originally supposed to go after the “worst of the worst,” he said.
“It is a good first step,” he said.
While Horrigan said its basic functions are needed, hopefully ICE will be reorganized in a few years.
Anna Linden of Dover said everyone is talking about ICE in her community and they don’t know what is going on, like a “runaway train.”
She said she is in support as a mom and “local control is so important.”
David Holt of Somersworth also spoke in support of the bill.
After the hearing, the House Republican office issued a news release quoting Rep. Roy headlined, ” If House Democrats Want Open Borders, They Should Head to Minnesota.”
He was critical of “HB 1570-FN-L and HB 1822-FN, “a pair of bills meant to weaken New Hampshire’s Border Security.”
Roy said: “Make no mistake, if you are in this country illegally, you are not welcome in New Hampshire. Today’s bill hearings were nothing short of another Democratic attempt to subvert law and order. It is no mistake that New Hampshire ranks #1 in the country for public safety, thanks to our Anti-Sanctuary policies. These policies ensure that we are not a land of lawless bedlam. If Democrats want open-border nonsense, then I invite them to pack their bags and head for Minnesota.”