South Bay leaders announce plan to impede construction of ICE facilities using bureaucratic red tape
A recent effort by the federal government to build a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement facility in southern Santa Clara County near Gilroy has galvanized those in opposition. On Wednesday, South Bay leaders announced a new strategy to prevent immigration detention centers in the area by using normal government bureaucracy as their weapon.
South Bay officials and immigrant advocates met for a press conference at San Jose City Hall to discuss a new approach in the fight against ICE detention centers. But first, Rep. Sam Liccardo (D-San Jose) explained why that mattered.
"The Bay Area has avoided the worst of ICE's large-scale activities, in part, because of the lack of detention facilities here," he said.
Liccardo admitted that local jurisdictions have no authority to outright ban a federal facility, but he's offering a new strategy, based on already existing zoning and land-use regulations.
"It goes back to a 1926 decision, U.S. Supreme Court decision, called Euclid. Local communities have what's called the 'police power,' using land use to be able to protect the health and safety of their communities," Liccardo said. "There are a host of conditions that local communities can apply to a conditional use permit that will substantially impact the ability of ICE to be able to site these facilities."
"Sam's Toolkit," as some are calling it, spells out for local communities a list of conditions that can be legally contested, including zoning restrictions, environmental hazards, occupancy limits, and a whole host of other bureaucratic red tape — all designed to throw a legal monkey wrench into any construction plans.
"Sam's Toolkit lays out what we can do, what you can do, in communities, in council chambers, and in the courts, to prevent detention centers from being built here," said Rep. Jimmy Panetta (D-Monterey).
The toolkit includes a fill-in-the-blank template for cities looking to adopt their own identical ordinance. It all starts with declaring a moratorium, which the San Jose City Council will be hearing next month. San Jose Mayor Matt Mahan didn't seem to have much doubt that it will pass.
"When we have this moratorium in place, we will undertake an evaluation of the health, human safety, and environmental impacts of these facilities," Mahan said.
They are the same kind of bureaucratic roadblocks that have prevented housing construction in many communities over the years. Farmworker housing advocate Belinda Hernandez-Arriaga, who normally fights such regulations, doesn't mind using the tools to keep ICE from finding a home in her area.
"This is not just about the building of detention centers," Hernandez-Arriaga said. "This is about the restoration of humanity. It's about demanding that we deserve more, better, safety, protection. ICE has no place in here."
CBS News Bay Area reached out to ICE for comment on the issue but got no response on Wednesday. The U.S. Department of Homeland Security has previously denied it had plans for a new detention facility at 7240 Holdsclaw Road in an unincorporated part of the county just east of Gilroy city limits.
It will ultimately be decided by the courts and Liccardo said that, to him, is the whole point. He said it's unlikely that private landowners will want to enter into a deal with ICE if their payment may be held up by litigation for the next four or five years.
