WHITE RIVER JUNCTION — Residents in four communities at the heart of the Upper Valley will vote this Town Meeting season on similar “welcoming” proposals that would limit communication between local law enforcement and federal authorities about immigration.
But the Trump administration’s recent crackdown on “sanctuary cities,” as well as a recent federal appeals court ruling regarding immigration enforcement, has some local officials wondering how the proposals might affect federal grant funding.
“Welcoming” ordinances are on the table in Hanover, Hartford and Lebanon, while Norwich is considering an enhanced “fair and impartial policing” policy. The details vary, but each proposal aims to prohibit local police from sharing information on a person’s immigration status with federal authorities like Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
And while none of the proposals consider declaring “sanctuary city” status, a colloquialism that connotes total non-cooperation with federal immigration authorities, they share some overlap with the policies held by sanctuary cities elsewhere.
Passing the ordinances could be a show of support for undocumented immigrants, many of whom are scared to report crimes or interact with police for fear of having their immigration status discovered and shared with ICE, said Asma Elhuni, an activist and vocal supporter of Hartford’s proposal, which will appear on the ballot March 3.
“(The ordinance) sends a strong message to immigrants that we care about them and want them to be safe,” she said.
The proposal in Hartford would bar town employees, including police, from asking people about their citizenship status and from detaining people based on their status. It also restricts town employees from sharing immigration status information with federal authorities.
The Selectboard pushed to bring the measure to voters, though the ordinance conflicts with two federal laws passed in 1996 that say local governments cannot keep citizenship information from federal authorities, according to an informational pamphlet from the Vermont Chapter of the National Lawyers guild. However, the pamphlet noted, the federal laws have been deemed unconstitutional in federal courts in other states.
Initially, in an effort to keep from violating the law, some Hartford Selectboard members considered adding a “savings clause” that would have exempted Hartford police from part of the ordinance, allowing them to share information on a person’s immigration status with federal authorities. However, they ultimately decided not to include the savings clause in the final ballot question.
As in Hartford, Lebanon’s proposed ordinance, which voters will decide on the March 10 city ballot, says city employees are barred from asking about immigration status, detaining someone based on immigration status or sharing immigration status with federal authorities.
But Lebanon’s ordinance, which was added by a petition signed by more than 680 residents, has an additional provision: If city employees learn that federal immigration authorities, such as Border Patrol officers, are in Lebanon, they would be required to alert residents.
Hanover’s Town Meeting isn’t until May, but officials plan to hold a special meeting on March 23 to decide which version of the ordinance — if any — should go on the ballot.
Members of a Welcoming Hanover Committee want the town to include on the ballot a “Welcoming Hanover” ordinance, which says immigration is a civil issue and cannot be enforced by local police. It also says that police cannot detain someone without probable cause and cannot share information on a person’s immigration status with federal authorities. As in Lebanon, they too wanted to include the provision requiring the town to alert residents if ICE or Border Patrol are in Hanover.
But Town Manager Julia Griffin said she and other officials were concerned about the legality of the last provision. She put forward a revised draft, calling the proposal a “fair and impartial policing” ordinance instead of a welcoming ordinance, and omitting the provision about warning residents.
Griffin said both versions of the proposal — as well as a third, “middle ground” proposal that she has yet to draft — will be presented to the Selectboard at the March meeting.
As in Hanover, Norwich officials are considering a policy change rather than a welcoming ordinance.
The town’s proposed “fair and impartial policing” policy, which goes up for a vote at Town Meeting March 3, would bar police from inquiring about a person’s immigration status, detaining them for their immigration status or sharing immigration information with federal authorities.
All four communities’ proposals have drawn both ardent support and some harsh criticism, especially from people wondering how — if at all — the proposals might affect grant applications.
In 2017, President Donald Trump passed an executive order saying that “sanctuary cities” refusing to comply with immigration enforcement measures won’t be eligible to receive federal grant funding.
And on Wednesday, the U.S. 2nd Circuit Court of appeals ruled that the Trump administration can withhold law enforcement grant money from cities that don’t cooperate with U.S. immigration enforcement. The ruling affects Vermont, which is within the 2nd Circuit, but not New Hampshire, which is overseen by the 1st Circuit.
But Kira Kelley, an attorney from Vermont who’s helping to push some of the ordinances through, said the ruling has no repercussions in Norwich or Hartford because it extends only to Justice Assistance Grant funding, which neither town has applied for in years.
Norwich Town Manager Herb Durfee said it’s unclear how the ruling will impact Norwich, but that the town does periodically apply for grants from the U.S. Department of Justice.
In Hartford, City Manager Brannon Godfrey said in a Wednesday email that, while the ruling is limited to withholding law enforcement grant funds, “it seems to be an indicator of which way the 2nd Federal Circuit is leaning.”
Regardless of the ruling, the Hartford police department is still working on a Community-Oriented Policing Services — or COPS — grant application due this month, he said.
Lebanon City Manager Shaun Mulholland said that while the ruling affects only JAG funding now, the order “sets a precedent” of withholding federal grant funding from communities that don’t cooperate with immigration enforcement. That means the ordinance could likely affect whether the city receives a COPS grant from the federal government in the future, he said.
“We believe that we would need to discontinue our present grant when and if the present so-called ‘Welcoming Lebanon’ ordinance is passed. We do not have any intentions at the present time to apply for future COPS grant,” Mulholland said in an email Wednesday.
Griffin, the Hanover town manager, said she hopes to craft a policy that makes clear that Hanover is not declaring itself a sanctuary city, such as by not including the requirement to alert residents. She noted that sanctuary cities adopt policies that prevent local police from cooperating with federal immigration authorities at all, including by sheltering immigrants who are accused of a crime. Hanover’s potential ordinance merely stipulates that the town does not arrest and hold anyone based on a civil violation, like immigration law, she said.
“While this Ordinance is intended to ensure that Department members honor the human and constitutional rights of those with whom they come into contact, nothing in this directive shall be construed to prevent Department members from engaging in lawful police activity, including ascertaining the identity of persons lawfully detained or arrested for criminal conduct, or to confirm or dispel reasonable suspicion of criminal conduct concerning any violation of state,” the Hanover draft reads.
Some town officials say they are cognizant that federal authorities are watching this play out. Griffin said that, after some news reports earlier this month inaccurately labeled Hanover’s proposal as part of the sanctuary city movement, she received a call from the U.S. Attorney in Concord. She subsequently sent him the latest draft under consideration.
Anna Merriman can be reached at amerriman@vnews.com or 603-727-3216.