Visitor asks about 287(g) agreement; commissioners say county will not place it on the agenda

During public comment at the Feb. 12 Beaver County Board of Commissioners meeting, resident John Kimball asked whether the commission planned to consider approving a '2 87 g' agreement — referenced in the meeting as a 287(g) agreement between local law enforcement and federal immigration authorities — citing concerns about alleged abuses by ICE and DHS.

John Kimball asked: "I wanted to know if the commission is are we considering your approval of the 2 87 g agreement in light of no abuses of power and lack of crime that have been committed by ICE and DHS agents..." The presiding official responded that the board's stance "hasn't changed" and said, "the 2 87 g agreement will not come forward onto 1 of our agendas." Staff and other speakers added that the county commission had not been presented with a proposed county agreement from the sheriff and that, according to comments in the meeting, a sheriff's office can enter such an agreement without county approval and that courts have ruled those agreements legal in some contexts.

The exchange in the meeting did not record any board action to adopt or rescind a 287(g) agreement; commissioners described the current status as there being no county-level agreement before them. The meeting transcript records discussion that some other municipalities have ended such agreements and others are considering doing so, but no formal county directive or vote on 287(g) was made at this session.

Next steps, as stated in the meeting, are procedural: the board indicated it would not place a 287(g) agreement on a future agenda unless presented with a formal request; the sheriff’s independent agreement was described as outside the commission’s agenda process.