HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/11/2017 05A Inclusive Policing Ordinance; Rescinding Prior Vote to Terminate ConsiderationBUSINESS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
YAKIMA, WASHINGTON
AGENDASTATEMENT
Item No. 5.A.
For Meeting of: July 11, 2017
ITEM TITLE: City Council motion from June 20, 2017, to consider rescinding the
prior Council vote of April 4, 2017 that terminated consideration of
the inclusive policing ordinance
SUBMITTED BY: Cliff Moore, City Manager
SUMMARY EXPLANATION:
ITEM BUDGETED:
STRATEGIC PRIORITY:
APPROVED FOR
SUBMITTAL:cl*�
""""`City Manager
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
BOARD/COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION:
Distributed at the
Meeting
RE: Yakima Ordinance
1. The Proposed Ordinance Does Not Violate Federal Law
a. Under the Tenth Amendment, local governments cannot be
commandeered to enforce federal immigration laws. Nothing in
federal law compels a local agency to investigate or comply with
federal immigration enforcement.'
2. The Proposed Ordinance Does Not Threaten Yakima's Federal Funding
a. The Administration has labeled jurisdictions that decline enforcement
of immigration law as "sanctuary jurisdictions" and has threatened to
strip federal funding based on an alleged violation of 8 U.S.C. 1373.
b. A federal court in California has recently enjoined the federal
government from acting on its threats to withdraw funds from so-
called"Sanctuary Cities."2
3. The Proposed Ordinance Institutionalizes Best Practices and Upholds the
Washington Constitution
a. The Washington Constitution prohibits law enforcement from
inquiring into one's immigration status. In 2013, a Superior Court in
Ramirez-Rangel v. Kitsap County,3 declared that Article I, Section 7,
of the Washington State Constitution is violated when state law
enforcement officers prolong a detention to question or investigate
individuals about their immigration status. Therefore, the ordinance
institutionalizes constitutional practices and gives clear guidance to
law enforcement officers.
4. The Proposed Ordinance Promotes Public Safety and Optimizes Limited
Local Resources.
a. Choosing to engage in federal immigration enforcement results in
clear, negative consequences to public safety and local resources, and
increases liability risk. A study of police officers from across the
country and across the political spectrum, found that local enforcement
of federal immigration laws resulted in an increase in racial profiling,
increased fear in immigrant communities, and the undermining of trust
between law enforcement and the communities they serve.4
b. Under-reporting of crime in immigrant communities makes us all
less safe. When local police are viewed as an extension of the
immigration system, noncitizens are less likely to report crime or
See,Washington State Office of the Attorney General, Guidance Concerning Immigration
Enforcement p. 5, hupWagportal-
s3bucket.s3.ama onaws.com/uploadedtiles/Another/AGO"/`201mmigiation%20Guidancep(if(April
2017).
z County of Santa Clara v. Trump, 17-cv-00574 (N.D.Cal.April 25, 2017).
No. 12-2-09594-4 (Wash.Sup. Ct.,Aug. 16, 2013).
4 Doris Marie Provine et al., Policing Immigrants,Local Law Enforcement on the Front Lines(2016).
appear as witnesses,5 making us all less safe. Many in law enforcement
recognize that crime solving relies on community trust and
cooperation. As King County Sheriff Urquhart noted, if a community
is afraid that contacting law enforcement will result in deportation,
"[i]t's going to hinder our ability to solve, not only minor, but very
serious crimes."
c. Time spent engaging in federal immigration enforcement does not
advance public safety goals. Immigration enforcement commonly
targets individuals who pose no threat to public safety. In the first
three months of 2017, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)
arrested over 5,000 noncitizens without any criminal history.7
d. Participating in immigration enforcement comes at a cost. The
federal government does not reimburse the costs of local resources
used to collaborate in immigration enforcement. Expending scarce
local resources compromises the ability of local governments to meet
the needs of their community. Additionally, such enforcement exposes
a jurisdiction to costly litigation. It is unconstitutional for Yakima
Police to inquire into one's immigration status. Therefore, doing so
exposes the Police Department to costly civil litigation. Agencies can
both save money and prioritize public safety by declining to participate
in immigration enforcement.
e. Inclusions good for the economy. A recent study, analyzing the
federal go.�,rnment's o\,\m data, showed positive outcomes in
jurisdictions,that do not enforce immigration laws.Jurisdictions that
choose not to hold people for ICE have lower rates of crime, poverty,
and unemployment.8 In addition to a safer community, these reflect the
economic benefits of law enforcement building trust in local
communities.
Nik Theodore, Insecm•e Communities:Latino Perceptions of Police Involvement in Immigration
Enforcement,
littl)://www.VolicyliAorg/sites/default/files/INS1,`C;UR1? C OMAJUNffIF=S IRPTORT FINAL.PD
(May 2013).
f9 Sheriff John Urquhart,Kings News, littp:Hwww king5.corn/news/politics/raw-sheriff-urquhart-on-
trunip-imn�ration order/393696427 (January 26, 2017).
7 Maria Sacchetti,ICE immigration arrests of noncrimmals double under Trump,
littDs:Hww-,�,.wasliingt.onL)ost.cony/local/immigration-arrests--of-noncriminals-double-under-
trump/2017104;16/98a2f1e2-2096-I1e7-be2a-3a1fb24d4671 storyhtml?lipid=hp rip-more-top
stories no-name%3Ahoinet)age'1X,2F'story&.utm term=.419163f25d29 (April 16,2017).
$Toni K.Wong, The Effects of Sanctuary Policies on Crime and the Economy,
hops:l/cvww.ameri ranprogress.org/issuesli mtnigrati on/relaortsi2017/01/26/297366/the-effects-of-
sanctuarypoiicies-on-crime-and-the-econome 1(January 26, 2017).
Distributed at the ¢S--
Meeting 7 _ -7
Honorable Council Members.
"This move on the part of the Yakima council is a betrayal
of the promise of an open, honest discussion of inclusive
policing that was made at their last meeting. Public
safety requires that all residents feel safe coming to local
police officers when they have an issue. While we are
pleased with Yakima's consideration of an ordinance that
would prevent the City of Yakima from detaining
immigrants longer than required, we call on the city to
discuss and pass the original inclusive policing ordinance
that includes language preventing city police from asking
residents about their immigration status. The safety of
Yakima's residents demands no less."
Thankyou
Mary Lopez
OneAmerica Organizer