HANOVER — The Selectboard voted unanimously to amend a policing ordinance that had prohibited Hanover police from working with U.S. immigration authorities.
On Monday night, the Selectboard opted to amend its Fair and Impartial Policing policy to remove any language that violates state laws passed in May, which bar municipalities from crafting such policies.
The board added some clarifying language to the policy, including that “Department officers do not have the authority to independently enforce federal civil immigration law,” but must cooperate with federal agents if requested.
Under the new policy, Hanover police are required to comply with ICE detainers, as is now required under state law, and to cooperate with ICE if they are requested to.
When ICE is interested in a person held by law enforcement, they can issue a detainer to request that the person remain in custody to give ICE more time to decide if they want to take that person into federal custody.
The board briefly discussed taking out any reference to ICE Monday night, with member Jennie Chamberlain citing that the language may be unnecessary and just reiterates state law.
But, adding the language provides “clarity” for both law enforcement and Hanover visitors and residents, argued Board Chair Carey Callaghan.
“If it’s not said, it’s potentially misunderstood,” Callaghan said.
Over its past several meetings, the group has mulled how to respond to the new laws, which are set to take effect Jan. 1 and carry financial penalties.
The town’s policy aims to prevent “biased policing and other discriminatory practices” by Hanover police officers. It has been on the books since 2020 and was bolstered at Town Meeting in May to specifically prohibit Hanover police from entering cooperative agreements with ICE. The policy directed officers not to contact or interact with ICE officers about someone’s undocumented status or assist federal immigration officers, and not to cooperate with ICE detainers.
The board and Town Manager Rob Houseman debated multiple paths forward for the ordinance including keeping it in place or repealing it entirely.
If it was kept on the books, the town would have been subject to a financial penalty of up to 25% of the funding it receives from the state. This would be about $354,000, Houseman said last month.
The town also could have been subject to penalties from the New Hampshire Attorney General, Houseman wrote in a recent email to the Selectboard.
Hanover and Lebanon were the only two municipalities in New Hampshire with policies on the books that violated the new state laws set to take effect in January. Lebanon repealed its own similar policy early last month.