IA Detention Center bid roils Burlington

[zeezil]

Customs office bid roils Burlington
By Eric Moskowitz
The Boston Globe, November 27, 2007

Burlington — After dozens of residents denounced the federal government’s plan to relocate its regional immigration headquarters here, the Board of Selectmen voted last night to call a special Town Meeting to consider ways to fight the move.

The Department of Homeland Security hopes to open by Jan. 1 a 40,000-square-foot headquarters for Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Detention and Removal Operations, which processes people accused of violating immigration laws and identified for possible deportation. The project is nearly complete. The Immigration Enforcement agency needs to obtain a certificate of occupancy from the town.

After a forum with federal officials that drew about 150 people last night, selectmen responded to calls for action by voting unanimously to plan a special Town Meeting session. The selectmen will set the date of the session Monday. Officials did not know what the warrant would look like, but it could include a request for legal fees to fight the project, or for a detailed explanation of how it was allowed to proceed.

The Customs plan has been developing for more than a year, but many residents and local officials learned about it only recently, prompting outcry at meetings.

Only the building inspector, John Clancy, reviewed the full plans when they were submitted; he determined that headquarters would principally be an office use, making the ‘holding rooms’ an accessory use that did not need review by a town board. That meant the Planning Board reviewed only minor engineering changes to the exterior and grounds.

Federal officials said last night they would probably apply for a certificate of occupancy shortly. The permit would need to be approved by Clancy, who has stood by his interpretation of the bylaws.

Town counsel John Giorgio said he believed the building inspector properly interpreted town bylaws, and he advised townspeople against trying to influence Clancy’s decision.

Federal officials last night tried to ease concerns about the center, which they said would be an administrative office that would not hold detainees overnight. But that did little to appease those who criticized the proposal, said they felt deceived by federal officials, and expressed misgivings about the location - between the Burlington Mall and the Lahey Clinic.

At a selectmen’s meeting that immediately followed the forum, several residents called on the board to try to stop the project.

‘I think I speak for most people here that we don’t want this facility in our town,’ Mark Casey said, drawing applause. ‘I just hope you’ll do the right thing.’

Bruce E. Chadbourne, New England field office director for the Immigration Enforcement agency, said the office would employ about 120 law-enforcement agents and staff and would process about a dozen alleged illegal immigrants a day before they are transported to county jails to await the conclusion of their cases.
http://www.oneoldvet.com/?page_id=3827#2
http://www.boston.com/news/local/articl ... urlington/

[Jean]

Residents continue to fight immigration facility
By JOHN WHITE news@woburnonline.com

BURLINGTON — At a meeting following a public forum on the issue, the Board of Selectmen voted unanimously to call a special Town Meeting on the issue of plans by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to locate a processing facility in New England Executive Park.

The date for the special session will be set when the selectmen meet on Monday, Dec. 3.

Monday night's forum, held in the Marshall Simonds Middle School auditorium, was scheduled in response to concerns and criticism expressed by residents when it became known the facility, to be located in Building 10 in the park, would contain "holding rooms."

The park is located off Mall Road, behind the Burlington Mall.

Bruce Chadbourne, field office director for the ICE New England Field Office, was in attendance along with Deputy Field Director James Martin. Representing the General Services Administration (GSA), which advertised for a location and entered into the lease, were Michael Strobel, lead realty specialist, and Michael Dunbar. The building is owned by local developer Robert Murray.

Following a discussion on the issue at a community meeting involving U.S. Rep. John Tierney, D-Salem, the town drafted a series of questions. ICE responded in writing to the questions and copies of those questions and answers were made available at Monday night's forum, which was attended by more than 100 town officials, residents, and other interested parties.

The selectmen's decision to call the special Town Meeting came after more than three hours of discussion which started with the forum, which was scheduled to conclude at 9, and the subsequent selectmen's meeting, into which the discussion overlapped.

ICE is in the process of doing construction work inside and outside the building and hopes to start operations next month.

A minor engineering change was approved for the building in September 2006 by the Planning Board. During that discussion, there was no mention of holding rooms.

Inspector of Buildings John Clancy ruled the holding areas were an incidental use and that the main function would be office use. He has stated the ICE plan conforms to the zoning bylaw.

As happened at last week's regular selectmen's meeting, questions were raised about stopping the issuance of an occupancy permit. The permit is issued by the inspector of buildings.

Associate Town Counsel John Giorgio cautioned the selectmen do not have the power to stop the building inspector from issuing the permit.

"If you go down that route ... I guarantee you will not be happy with that result," stated Giorgio.

He explained the issuance of an occupancy permit can be appealed within 30 days to the Board of Appeals. That decision can subsequently be appealed to the courts.

Giorgio stated Clancy's initial ruling on zoning can also be challenged by any party wishing to do so.

He said a letter can be sent to the inspector asking for a review of zoning enforcement. If the party filing the challenge is displeased by the inspector's decision, an appeal can be filed with the Board of Appeals.

Once again, that decision can be appealed to the courts.

Giorgio also warned the selectmen cannot order the inspector to make a determination within a certain time period.


ICE, GSA comment


At the start of the public forum, Chadbourne stated there will be 110 to 120 employees in the building, about 100 of whom will be armed federal agents.

"We arrest, detain, and remove people from the United States," he said in explaining the function of ICE.

According to Chadbourne, about 11 to 12 individuals would be processed per day in Burlington. Processing takes one to two hours, he stated. The Burlington facility, which is about 38,000 square feet, would serve as New England headquarters and would process persons from Massachusetts, Maine, and New Hampshire.

He said there are four holding rooms, two for pre-processing and two for post-processing. Chadbourne said there are no cots, no food facilities, and no one would be housed overnight.

Those who are detained go to county jails, he stated.

Chadbourne said the facility will generally operate Monday through Friday under normal work hours. He said there might be a need to process persons occasionally at night or on weekends, but there are no night or weekend shifts.

According to information provided by ICE, about two-thirds of those processed would be administrative detainees who are illegally in the country. Around one-third would be individuals in the country illegally who have been incarcerated, completed their sentence, and are to be deported.

ICE currently operates out of the Kennedy Federal Building in downtown Boston.


Comments, questions


Many of those in attendance spoke, with virtually all in opposition to ICE locating in Burlington.

Catherine and Rev. Roderick MacDonald did raise questions about children at the site and whether detainees would be treated humanely.

Chadbourne said children are seldom at the facility as detainees usually make arrangements with friends and relatives.

Martin stated the facilities are inspected by a private party to make sure detainees are treated properly.

Town Meeting Rep. Louis Rubino asked why the facility is in Burlington rather than Boston or Lexington.

Strobel responded it is a competitive bid process.

He said a Charlestown location was selected but the Massachusetts Turnpike Authority has control over the tenants and did not want ICE in the building. In Lexington, stated Strobel, the building selected was sold (as part of a group of buildings) before a lease could be executed.

The Burlington location was then the most competitive bid, said Strobel.

Asked why ICE does not do processing at county jails, Chadbourne said it would be impractical and more costly. He said a central location is more efficient in terms of technology.

"Operationally, it wouldn't be feasible," stated Chadbourne.

Rubino said there are public safety concerns as people being brought to the ICE facility are different than those processed through the Burlington town jail.

Chadbourne said violators brought in are not considered criminals, they are administrative violators. He said those who have finished serving their sentences would be released out onto the streets if they did not have immigration issues.

A number of speakers expressed concern about detainees escaping.

Chadbourne said in his 20 years as a manager, there have been no escapes.

He also stated there have been no disruptions in the ICE facility in that time.

"In my 20 years, we haven't had an incident," said Chadbourne.

Resident Paul LeClair asked why the plan for holding areas was not disclosed earlier.

"The lease has always envisioned holding rooms," stated Strobel, who stated Murray was aware of that.

Planning Board member Paul Raymond, the board chairman when the minor engineering change was approved, said he had "no idea" this would be the use.

"This came in under the radar," he stated.

Addressing questions about Clancy's ruling, Giorgio said he spoke with Clancy and found his decision "not unreasonable."

Town Meeting Rep. Diane Creedon, stating a view expressed throughout the session, stated, "I certainly don't want these type of people in my community."

Asked about protests, Chadbourne said there have been protests at the Boston site.

In addressing the weapons carried by agents, Chadbourne stated, "I can't remember any agents using a gun" in his time as a manager.

Town Meeting Rep. Thomas Killilea, as did numerous other speakers, cited the proximity of the facility to the mall, Lahey Clinic, and residential areas.

He said it was not a "not-in-my-back-yard" issue, but a matter of safety.

"Let's put it somewhere where it makes sense," said Killilea.

He added people in town will "do everything we can to fight this."

Resident Barbara L'Heureux said it was "shameful" Clancy and Murray were not in attendance for the meeting.

Town Meeting Phyllis Roussell commented this type of discussion should have occurred much earlier in the process.

"We should have been doing this a long time ago," she said.

Resident Mark Casey questioned whether the primary use was for offices since there are far more law enforcement officers than office workers.

Town Meeting Rep. Jack Kelly raised the possibility of the special Town Meeting, stating it would give Town Meeting an opportunity to state what it meant in the zoning bylaw.

When ICE officials were asked if they would wait for the outcome of a special Town Meeting, Chadbourne replied, "No, sir. We're proceeding."

After Kelly asked what the selectmen would do to assist in the process, Selectman Gary Gianino offered the motion for the special meeting.

http://www.woburnonline.com/frontpage/n ... 707-2.html