Glendale’s City Council is bracing for a contentious meeting on Tuesday night after the recent termination of a longstanding contract with U.S. Homeland Security and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) that allowed the agency to utilize the city’s jails.
This move comes on the heels of growing public pressure to end the agreement, particularly amidst an increase in immigration raids across Southern California.
While the city insists that the decision wasn’t politically motivated, it has drawn sharp lines between liberal and conservative residents in Los Angeles.
Initially signed in 2007, the ICE contract was brought back into the public eye when an immigration attorney highlighted it during the public comment segment of last week’s council meeting.
Many community members expressed confusion over how Glendale entered into such an agreement, especially considering California’s designation as a sanctuary state.
Under the California Values Act, or SB 54, enacted by former Governor Jerry Brown in 2017, local agencies are specifically prohibited from collaborating with ICE in certain capacities, including the use of law enforcement facilities to detain immigrants.
The initial contract managed to remain in effect because of its timing. Agreements established before June 15, 2017, were allowed to continue as per California law, provided there was no renewal or modification to the contract that would increase the number of detainees.
There remains some uncertainty regarding potential changes to the Glendale contract over the years. City documents indicate that the agreement was indefinite and generated a payment of slightly over $6,000 in 2016.
City spokesperson, Domenica Megerdichian, noted, ‘I believe the agreement allows for increases for the per diem contract rate. That was a discussion point in the last few weeks, but I don’t believe new rates have gone into effect.’
In this context, ‘per diem’ refers to the $85 ICE paid to Glendale for each detainee held per day.
LAist had inquired with ICE for comments regarding the termination of the contract and whether other municipalities still maintain similar agreements. However, a response was not received prior to publication.
The decision to cancel the contract was announced by Glendale’s City Manager, Roubik Golanian, in a statement released on Sunday evening.
‘This is a local decision and was not made lightly,’ the statement read.
‘The city recognizes that public perception of the ICE contract — no matter how limited or carefully managed, no matter the good — has become divisive.’
The statement further emphasized that the cancellation was not a politically driven decision and followed a thorough assessment of legal, operational, and community considerations.
While numerous residents have praised the city’s decision on social media, it has also drawn criticism from conservatives who argue it reflects a lack of support for the current administration’s immigration policies.
Glendale’s officials reiterated their commitment to compliance with SB 54, clarifying that the Police Department has not engaged in immigration enforcement nor will it do so in the future.
In response to an LAist inquiry regarding whether any individuals in ICE custody were being held in Glendale’s jail at the time of the cancellation, Megerdichian confirmed, ‘We don’t have any.’
Since January, Glendale reportedly held 82 immigrants in its jail.
Looking ahead, the ACLU of Southern California plans to be present at the Glendale City Council meeting on Tuesday to hold the council accountable for its actions.
Andrés Kwon, an attorney and senior policy counsel with the ACLU, stated that the Glendale jail was intended only for short-term detentions, typically between six to twelve hours. However, he disclosed instances where individuals were held over the weekend.
Among the inquiries the ACLU intends to address is how the city ensured that immigrants were not detained unconstitutionally and whether ICE mistakenly apprehended U.S. citizens who were subsequently placed in local jails.
Kwon highlighted that the ACLU has represented U.S. citizens subject to ICE immigration holds, sharing an example from Burbank. Furthermore, data indicates that ICE enforcement actions have occasionally affected U.S. citizens while investigating individuals’ immigration status, as reported by the U.S. Government Accountability Office.
Kwon remarked that SB 54 serves as a ‘legal floor’ and expressed intentions to advocate for Glendale to implement its own sanctuary city ordinance, allowing for more specific regulations.
He concluded, ‘Ending this shocking contract to detain Angelenos for ICE and simply complying with SB 54 are the bare minimum actions that the city can take to support their immigrant community members.’
image source from：https://laist.com/news/la-county-glendale-ice-contract-terminated
